On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Pierre GM <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Apr 5, 2011, at 11:52 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:45 PM, Skipper Seabold <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Charles R Harris >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Should skiprows be removed? >>>> >>>> if skiprows: >>>> warnings.warn(\ >>>> "The use of `skiprows` is deprecated, it will be removed in >>>> numpy 2.0.\n" \ >>>> "Please use `skip_header` instead.", >>>> DeprecationWarning) >>>> skip_header = skiprows >>>> >>>> Its been deprecated since 1.4. Personally, I like skiprows better than >>>> skip_header ;) >>>> >>> >>> +1 for skiprows. I always have to look it up. >> >> To me one is not much better than the other, but -1 for skiprows >> because un-deprecating it and deprecating skip_header is inconsistent >> and annoying for users. > > -1 for skiprows. When I introduced skip_footer, it looked more consistent to > have a skip_header and skip_footer than a skiprows and a skip_footer. > Now, we could probably find more meaningful names, like, skip_header_rows... > OK, just joking. >
I'm only slightly serious here, but inconsistent keywords are also annoying for users. e.g. vs. numpy.loadtxt, though I know that the use cases are slightly different. To my mind, skip_headers is a bool and skiprows is (more general and) an int. Using R too much maybe. Skipper _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
