On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:17 AM, Matthew Rocklin <mrock...@gmail.com> wrote:
> How would the community handle the scipy.sparse matrix subclasses? These > are still in common use. > They're not going anywhere for quite a while (until the sparse ndarrays materialize at least). Hence np.matrix needs to be moved, not deleted. We discussed this earlier this year: https://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2017-January/076332.html > Somewhat related: https://github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/8162 > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:13 PM, <josef.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> 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'd suggest any release in the next couple of years is fine,but the one where we drop Python 2 support is probably the worst choice. That's one of the few things the core Python devs got 100% right with the Python 3 move: advocate that in the 2->3 transition packages would not make any API changes in order to make porting the least painful. Ralf > >> 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 >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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