On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Marten van Kerkwijk <
m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My two ¢: keep things as they are. There is just two much code that
> uses the C definition of bools, 0=False, 1=True. Coupled with casting
> every outcome that is unequal to 0 as True, * as AND, + as OR, a
About visibility of deprecations: this is *very* tricky - if we make
it more visible, every user is going to see deprecation warnings all
the time, about things they can do nothing about, because they occur
inside other packages. I think in the end the only choice is to have
automated testing that
Just as a comment: It would be really nice if NumPy could slow down the
pace of deprecations, or at least make the warnings about deprecations more
visible. It seems like every release breaks some subset of our test suite
(we only had one or two cases of using the binary - operator on boolean
array
My two ¢: keep things as they are. There is just two much code that
uses the C definition of bools, 0=False, 1=True. Coupled with casting
every outcome that is unequal to 0 as True, * as AND, + as OR, and -
as XOR makes sense (and -True would indeed be True, but I'm quite
happy to have that one rem
