A valid use case for flow style
See original GitHub issueMaybe I shouldn’t use strictyaml for linear algebra heavy stuff.
matrix: [
[ 2., 5., 1.],
[ 3., 2., 3.],
[ 4., 1., 2.],
]
matrix_strict:
-
- 2.
- 5.
- 1.
-
- 3.
- 2.
- 3.
-
- 4.
- 1.
- 2.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 6 years ago
- Reactions:2
- Comments:7 (2 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Guidelines: Use Case
You can describe use cases in many styles. As an example we show the basic flow of events of the use case Administer...
Read more >Use Case Narrative - Useful Use Case Description Tips
Basic Flow Of Events (aka Happy Path or Basic path). This is the 'guts' of the use case and describes the sequence of...
Read more >What is Use Case Specification? - Visual Paradigm
The use case specification is typically created in analysis and design phase in an iterative manner. At first, only a brief description of...
Read more >Use Cases | Usability.gov
A use case is a written description of how users will perform tasks on your website. It outlines, from a user's point of...
Read more >Use Cases
UML use cases diagrams are “secondary-value” ... Another is concrete style that embeds user interface decisions ... Which of these are valid use...
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Two can play at that game.
It’s only 44 characters, 10 characters longer, Those 10 characters add enough semantics that all yaml parsers can parse these into native data structures without a specialized parser. And I think it is fairly easy to parse for humans too.
I don’t have any more arguments, I think we can agree to disagree.
I can make it do something like this, which is terser than both, if you like:
Python::
How does that sound?