On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Warren Weckesser <warren.weckes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: >> >> Regarding names: shuffle/permutation is a terrible naming convention >> IMHO and shouldn't be propagated further. We already have a good >> naming convention for inplace-vs-sorted: sort vs. sorted, reverse vs. >> reversed, etc. >> >> So, how about: >> >> scramble + scrambled shuffle individual entries within each >> row/column/..., as in Warren's suggestion. >> >> shuffle + shuffled to do what shuffle, permutation do now (mnemonic: >> these break a 2d array into a bunch of 1d "cards", and then shuffle >> those cards). >> >> permuted remains indefinitely, with the docstring: "Deprecated alias >> for 'shuffled'." > > That sounds good to me. (I might go with 'randomize' instead of 'scramble', > but that's a second-order decision for the API.)
I hesitate to use names like "randomize" because they're less informative than they feel seem -- if asked what this operation does to an array, then it would be natural to say "it randomizes the array". But if told that the random module has a function called randomize, then that's not very informative -- everything in random randomizes something somehow. -n -- Nathaniel J. Smith Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh http://vorpus.org _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
