Conversation
|
I don't see what this PR is trying to accomplish. Seems to just be renaming some files?? |
|
Indeed, I agree that's not a critical MR. Still, it does a little bit more than just renaming examples which original was confusing (test_feedback.py does not test feeback, but just controllability and observability). In the example of pole placement, the original file full of commented code, without any explanation for the user nor any tips on how to use the library. Moreover, the commented code seems to imply that So I cleaned commented code, I highlighted for new users of the library how they can try to use slycot with the useful To me, the example is a lot clearer this way, don't you think so? Original code New code |
Since previous PR #266 came a little bit too late, this one only aims at cleaning 2 examples.