Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[not Eval] Unify expression: pth => path #700

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 2, 2023

Conversation

mai-nakagawa
Copy link
Contributor

@mai-nakagawa mai-nakagawa commented Apr 17, 2023

In the notebooks under examples directory, there are variables using either pth or path for the same purpose. For better readability, I think we should unify the expression.

@mai-nakagawa mai-nakagawa changed the title Unify expression: pth => path [not Eval] Unify expression: pth => path Apr 17, 2023
@mai-nakagawa mai-nakagawa marked this pull request as ready for review April 17, 2023 05:35
Copy link
Contributor

@jwang47 jwang47 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the contribution!

@jwang47 jwang47 merged commit 3796468 into openai:main Jun 2, 2023
@mai-nakagawa mai-nakagawa deleted the typo/pth-to-path branch June 2, 2023 22:13
arbreton pushed a commit to arbreton/evals that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2023
In the notebooks under `examples` directory, there are variables using
either `pth` or `path` for the same purpose. For better readability, I
think we should unify the expression.
jacobbieker pushed a commit to withmartian/-ARCHIVED--router-evals that referenced this pull request Jan 9, 2024
In the notebooks under `examples` directory, there are variables using
either `pth` or `path` for the same purpose. For better readability, I
think we should unify the expression.
Linmj-Judy pushed a commit to TablewareBox/evals that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2024
In the notebooks under `examples` directory, there are variables using
either `pth` or `path` for the same purpose. For better readability, I
think we should unify the expression.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants