[Numpy-discussion] Rename arguments to np.clip and np.put
Jaime Fernández del Río
jaime.frio at gmail.com
Mon Mar 30 19:16:38 EDT 2015
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Allan Haldane <allanhaldane at gmail.com>
> Hello everyone,
> What does the list think of renaming the arguments of np.clip and np.put
> to match those of ndarray.clip/put? Currently the signatures are
> np.clip(a, a_min, a_max, out=None)
> ndarray.clip(a, min=None, max=None, out=None)
> np.put(a, ind, v, mode='raise')
> ndarray.put(indices, values, mode='raise')
> (The docstring for ndarray.clip is incorrect, too).
> I suggest the signatures might be changed to this:
> np.clip(a, min=None, max=None, out=None, **kwargs)
> np.put(a, indices, values, mode='raise')
> We can still take care of the old argument names for np.clip using
> **kwards, while showing a deprecation warning. I think that would be
> fully back-compatible. Note this makes np.clip more flexible as only one
> of min or max are needed now, just like ndarray.clip.
> np.put is trickier to keep back-compatible as it has two positional
> arguments. Someone who called `np.put(a, v=0, ind=1)` would be in
> trouble with this change, although I didn't find anyone on github doing
> so. I suppose to maintain back-compatibility we could make indices and
> values keyword args, and use the same kwargs trick as in np.clip, but
> that might be confusing since they're both required args.
Ideally we would want the signature to show as you describe it in the
documentation, but during the deprecation period be something like e.g.
np.put(a, indices=None, values=None, mode='raise', **kwargs)
Not sure if that is even possible, maybe with functools.update_wrapper?
> Any opinions or suggestions?
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
( > <) Este es Conejo. Copia a Conejo en tu firma y ayúdale en sus planes
de dominación mundial.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion