On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 3:27 PM Juan Nunez-Iglesias <jni.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 28, 2018, at 3:40 AM, Sebastian Berg wrote: > > > It’s consistent with np.newaxis in spelling (modulo the _) > > If mistyped, it can be caught easily by IDEs. > > It’s typeable with mypy, unlike constant string literals which > > currently aren’t > > If code written against new numpy is run on old numpy, it will error > > rather than doing the wrong thing > > I am not sure I think that the above are too strong arguments, since it > is not what is typically done for keywords (nobody suggests np.CLIP > instead of "clip"). Unless you feel this is different because it is a > mix of strings and bools here? > > > :+1: to Eric's list. I don't think it's different because of the mix, I > think it's different because deprecating things is painful. > Technically there's nothing we are deprecating. If anything, the one not super uncommon pattern will be that people use 0/1 instead of False/True, which works as expected now and will start raising in case we'd go with np.never_copy But now that we have good typing in Python, I think of string literals as > an anti-pattern going forward. > I don't quite get that, it'll still be the most Pythonic thing to do in many API design scenarios. Adding a new class instance with unusual behavior like raising on bool() is not even a pattern, it would just be an oddity. > But, for me, the biggest reason is the silent different behaviour in old > vs new NumPy. As a package maintainer this is just a nightmare. > That is the main downside indeed in this particular case. > I have a lot of sympathy for the ugliness argument, but I don't think > `np.never_copy` (or e.g. `np.modes.never`) is that much worse than a string. > The point is not that `.reshape(..., copy=np.never_copy)` is uglier (it is, but indeed just a little), but that we're adding a new object to the numpy namespace that's without precedent. If we'd do that regularly the API would really blow up. np.newaxis is not relevant here - it's a simple alias for None, is just there for code readability, and is much more widely applicable than np.never_copy would be. Cheers, Ralf
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
