[issue30464] gammavariate has a wrong comment

Mark Dickinson added the comment: That should clearly have been "different stream" rather than "difference stream". -- ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30464] gammavariate has a wrong comment

Mark Dickinson added the comment: This was fixed in PRs GH-1798 and GH-1934. Closing. -- stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30464] gammavariate has a wrong comment

SilentGhost added the comment: Does "a difference stream" in PR 1934 (news entry): > It does however produce a difference stream of random variables than it used > to. make some sense? Sentence doesn't seem grammatical. -- nosy: +SilentGhost resolution: -> fixed __

[issue30464] gammavariate has a wrong comment

Changes by Leonardo De Marchi : -- pull_requests: +2012 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https:/

[issue30464] gammavariate has a wrong comment

Changes by Leonardo De Marchi : -- pull_requests: +1896 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https:/

[issue30464] gammavariate has a wrong comment

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: I agree that the comment should be changed. While we at it, perhaps sync-up with expovariate() code and eliminate the ``u <= 1e-7`` test: Instead of: elif alpha == 1.0: # expovariate(1) u = random() while u <= 1e-

[issue30464] gammavariate has a wrong comment

Changes by Raymond Hettinger : -- nosy: +mark.dickinson, rhettinger ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscri

[issue30464] gammavariate has a wrong comment

New submission from Leonardo De Marchi: The gammavariate function in random.py has a wrong comment. It says that when alpha is one it's equivalent to call expovariate(1). We can see that is not true (see graphs) and it should be expovariate(1/beta). It's not a big deal but it can cause confusi