[Numpy-discussion] Adding a return value to np.random.shuffle

[Sebastian Berg]

On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 13:36 -0400, Joseph Fox-Rabinovitz wrote:
> Would it break backwards compatibility to add the input as a return
> value to np.random.shuffle? I doubt anyone out there is relying on
> the None return value.
> 

Well, python discourages this IIRC, and opts to not do these things for
in place functions (see random package specifically). Numpy breaks this
in a few places, but that is mostly because we have the out argument as
an optional input argument.

As is, it is a nice way of making people not write:

new = np.random.shuffle(old)

and think old won't change. So I think we should probably just stick
with the python/Guido van Rossum ideals, or did those change?

- Sebastian



> The change is trivial, and allows shuffling a new array in one line
> instead of two:
> 
>     x = np.random.shuffle(np.array(some_junk))
> 
> I've implemented the change in PR#10893.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> - Joe
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20180412/f4916482/attachment.sig>