Hi @Micky774 thank you for your feedback! I updated the code and added a test.

Hi @jeremiedbb, thanks for your feedback. I implemented them all!

I haven't checked out the wider context here yet -- is this a risk/concern with either the continuous/continuous or discrete/discrete case? I'll take a look later if you aren't readily sure.

It's more about improving the usability of that function. In case people use it wrongly (like I did) you left with a strange error message which does not hint you to the problem. So I had to understand the code first to find out what the problem is. That's why I thought having a clear error here could improve the user experience.

It's more about improving the usability of that function. In case people use it wrongly (like I did) you left with a strange error message which does not hint you to the problem. So I had to understand the code first to find out what the problem is. That's why I thought having a clear error here could improve the user experience.

Sure, the error is objectively a helpful addition! I just meant to ask if this error also present in any of the other cases or is it unique to the mixed continuous/discrete function where the check currently is.

It's more about improving the usability of that function. In case people use it wrongly (like I did) you left with a strange error message which does not hint you to the problem. So I had to understand the code first to find out what the problem is. That's why I thought having a clear error here could improve the user experience.

Sure, the error is objectively a helpful addition! I just meant to ask if this error also present in any of the other cases or is it unique to the mixed continuous/discrete function where the check currently is.

True, did not check this so fare. I only quickly looked over it and code wise it should work.

However, thinking about this I am wondering if the mutual information or more specific the entropy of a single value of a random variable is actually defined. Which would be the reason for masking unique values in the first place in this function. Which is than opening the question what to do with unique values for all the oder functions even if it would work code wise.