I think the current random infrastructure is mostly considered frozen anyway, even for bugfixes, given the pending NEP to produce a new random infrastructure and the commitment therein to guarantee that old random streams behave the same way given their extensive use in testing and so on. Maybe there are opportunities to have fruitful suggestions for the new system moving forward.
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 08:27, Alan Isaac <alan.is...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/10/2018 11:20 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > there is nothing wrong with the current API > > Just to be clear: you completely reject the past > cautions on this list against creating APIs > with flag parameters. Is that correct? > > Or is "nothing wrong" just a narrow approval in > this particular case? > > Alan Isaac > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
