Hi,
On Friday, April 5, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com > (mailto:matthew.br...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > How about: > > > > Step 1: 'order' remains as named keyword, layout added as alias, > > comment on the lines of "layout will become the default keyword for > > this option in later versions of numpy; please consider updating any > > code that does not need to remain backwards compatible'. > > > > Step 2: default keyword becomes 'layout' with 'order' as alias, > > comment like "order is an alias for 'layout' to maintain backwards > > compatibility with numpy <= 1.7.1', please update any code that does > > not need to maintain backwards compatibility with these numpy > > versions' > > > > Step 3: Add deprecation warning for 'order', "order will be removed as > > an alias in future versions of numpy" > > > > Step 4: (distant future) Remove alias > > > > ? > > A very strong -1 from me. Now we're talking about deprecation warnings and a > backwards compatibility break after all. I thought we agreed that this was a > very bad idea, so why are you proposing it now? > > Here's how I see it: deprecation of "order" is a no go. Therefore we have two > choices here: > 1. Simply document the current "order" keyword better and leave it at that. > 2. Add a "layout" (or "index_order") keyword, and live with both "order" and > "layout" keywords forever. > > (2) is at least as confusing as (1), more work and poor design. Therefore I > propose to go with (1). I agree with Ralf. It's not worth breaking backwards compatibility or supporting two flags (with only further potential for confusion). If we were designing a system from scratch, I concede that it _might_ have been better to use 'layout' instead of 'order'…. but that decision has already been made. This proposal fails the cost/benefit analysis, being too expensive for too little benefit. Regards, Brad _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
