Tim Peters <t...@python.org> added the comment:
Mark, you don't count ;-) Neither do I. Of course I've subclassed Random too, to experiment with other base generators (including PCG variants). But they're throwaways, and I don't care that it can require staring at the code to make as many changes as needed. Developers _of_ Python don't need things to be trivial to make quick progress. So I remain where I was: +0, provided there are no notable runtime regressions. Nice to have (hence "+"), but don't really care if it never happens (hence "0"). As to what numpy does, I'm always in favor of following their lead when possible and Pythonic. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue40346> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
