Minor updates to guide overview and guide basic operations #1757
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you Anna, this kind of improvement to readability is great.
I left a few notes where I think there could be some more improvement or typos.
I looks like you are getting used to the git workflow, I would suggest that you work in a branch. Working in master will make it harder to work on multiple sections in parallel and can make merge conflict harder to solve.
| @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ To begin, let us create a blank ``Qobj``: | |||
|
|
|||
| where we see the blank ``Qobj`` object with dimensions, shape, and data. Here the data corresponds to a 1x1-dimensional matrix consisting of a single zero entry. | |||
|
|
|||
| .. Hint:: By convention, Class objects in Python such as ``Qobj()`` differ from functions in the use of a beginning capital letter. | |||
| .. Hint:: By convention, the names of Python classes Python, such as ``Qobj()``, are capitalized and the names of functions are not. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Python classes Python: one too many Python?
| @@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ We can create a ``Qobj`` with a user defined data set by passing a list or array | |||
| [0.60111501 0.70807258 0.02058449 0.96990985] | |||
| [0.83244264 0.21233911 0.18182497 0.18340451]] | |||
|
|
|||
| Notice how both the dims and shape change according to the input data. Although dims and shape appear to have the same function, the difference will become quite clear in the section on :ref:`tensor products and partial traces <tensor>`. | |||
| Notice how both the dims and shape change according to the input data. Although dims and shape appear to be the same, dims keep track of the shapes for individual components of a multipartite system, while shape does not. See the section on :ref:`tensor products and partial traces <tensor>` and the table below. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since this is followed by the states and operators tables, and the Qobj attributes table is farther bellow, it is not clear which table is referred too. I would remove the last statement, (or move to switch the Qobj attributes and States and operators sections.)
| @@ -843,10 +844,10 @@ This isomorphism is implemented in QuTiP by the | |||
| np.testing.assert_almost_equal((rho - rho2).norm(), 0) | |||
|
|
|||
| The :attr:`~qutip.Qobj.type` attribute indicates whether a quantum object is | |||
| a vector corresponding to an operator (``operator-ket``), or its Hermitian | |||
| a vector corresponding to an operator (``operator-ket``), or to its Hermitian | |||
| conjugate (``operator-bra``). | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This whole sentence feels wrong, type can indicate a lot more than just those 2 cases, but it is worded as this is all it can do...
Description
Removed excess verbiage and unrecognizable figure. Corrected a grammatical error.
Related issues or PRs
No related issues
Changelog
Wordsmithing and cleanup.