Thanks for clarifying! In that case I think endorsing SPEC 7 makes sense. On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 3:08 PM Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 8:36 AM Nathan via NumPy-Discussion < numpy-discussion@python.org> wrote:
Since the legacy RNG interface cannot be deprecated and we encourage downstream to use it in tests according to the text of NEP 19, I'm not sure about the text in SPEC 7 that talks about deprecating using legacy RNGs. Or are you saying that we have now reached the point where we can update NEP 19 to encourage moving away from the legacy interface?
We have already always encouraged people to move away from the legacy interface in their APIs. SPEC 7 recommends a principled way for downstream projects to implement that move.
NEP 19 acknowledged that sometimes one might still have a use case for creating a legacy RandomState object and calling it in their tests to generate test data (but not otherwise pass that RandomState object to the code under test), but that's not what SPEC 7 addresses. NEP 19 doesn't really actively recommend the use of RandomState for this purpose, just acknowledges that it's a valid use case that numpy will continue to support even while we push for the exclusive use of Generator inside of library/program code. NEP 19 doesn't need an update for us to endorse SPEC 7 (whether it needs one, separately, to clarify its intent is another question).
-- Robert Kern