On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 4:39 AM <kaistri...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I'd like to raise the idea of updating the ``scipy.sparse.csgraph`` API to > use result objects rather than a mutable return signature. This was raised > by Jake from [scipy-20187](https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/20187) and > I think he has the right idea. Specifically I agree with: > > "These mutating signatures tend to be quite nasty especially as it doesn't > save on computation. Elsewhere in SciPy we often use results objects" > > Should there be some effort to rework the csgraph API to utilise a result > object? >
I don't think so. While we have learned that it is typically not good API design with `return_xxx` keywords that control how many return values a function has, the problems that such keywords create really aren't large enough to justify breaking changes to an otherwise well-designed API. Moreover, result objects don't quite solve the problems with static typing or being friendly to JIT compilers - that remains unchanged. Result objects in `optimize`, `integrate` and `stats` are useful to collect many return values, and they can also help with making functions extensible (adding extra/optional return values). But those aren't problems that the csgraph functions have. Cheers, Ralf
_______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list -- scipy-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to scipy-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/scipy-dev.python.org/ Member address: arch...@mail-archive.com
