On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Marten van Kerkwijk < m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All, > > I wondered if the move to python3-only starting with numpy 1.17 would > be a good reason to act on what we all seem to agree: that the matrix > class was a bad idea, with its overriding of multiplication and lack > of support for stacks of matrices. I don't think the matrix class was a bad idea at the time. numpy was the underdog, I came from GAUSS and Matlab and numpy arrays were just weird, especially loosing a dimension all the time and the heavy required use of np.newaxis. I guess nowadays kids don't learn `matrix` languages first anymore. recarrays are another half-hearted feature in numpy that is mostly obsolete with pandas and pandas_like DataFrames in other packages. (I don't mind the changes, but the deprecation cycle is often short, especially for users like me that update numpy only about every 3 main versions.) Josef > For 1.17, minimum python supposedly > is >=3.5, so we will be guaranteed to have the matrix multiply > operator @ available, and hence there is arguably even less of a case > for keeping the matrix class; removing it would allow taking out quite > a bit of accumulated special-casing (the immediate reasons for writing > this were gh-10123 and 10132). > > What do people think? If we do go in this direction, we might want to > add PendingDeprecationWarning for 1.15 (maybe DeprecationWarning for > python3; for python2 matrix would never disappear). > All the best, > > Marten > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
