Best Wishes I am really hesitant of changing the api, some packages might be dependent on it.
Regards Rakshit Kr. Singh On Sun, Sep 1, 2024, 5:54 PM oc-spam66--- via NumPy-Discussion < numpy-discussion@python.org> wrote: > I can summarize the different possibilities/proposals: > (A) Create new properties: add a `P.coef_natural` property, with a > suitable documentation ; maybe also add a `P.coef_internal` property. There > would be no change to the existing code (only addition of properties). > (B) Change `P.coef` attribute into a property, with a suitable > documentation. Hide `P.coef` attribute into `P._coef` (change existing > code). Do not create more properties (unlike A). > > - About (A), I don't think that adding `P.coef_natural` would add a risk. > - About (B), it may be appreciated that the API does not change (does not > occupy more namespace) > - Both (A) and (B) would help basic users to get out of the `P.coef` > attribute confusion. > > Side remark (not important): > > "natural" coefficients make very little if any sense for some of the > other polynomial subclasses, such as Chebyshev -- for those, there's > nothing natural about them! > Are you sure? Can they not be the weights at different order of > approximation of a solution? > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ > Member address: rakshitsingh...@gmail.com >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ Member address: arch...@mail-archive.com
