Hi all,
Just a few comments about this SLEP from a contributor and user of the
library :).
I think it is important for users to be able to quickly and easily
know/learn which arguments should be keyword arguments when they use
scikit-learn. As a user, I do not want to have to double check each
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 11:28:57PM +1000, Joel Nothman wrote:
> That is, we could consider this resolved after 14 votes in favour.
> So far, if I've interpreted correctly:
> +1 (adrin, nicolas, hanmin, joel, guillaume, jeremie, thomas, vlad, roman) =
> 9.
> I've not understood a clear position
I vote +1
Tom
Le lun. 16 sept. 2019 à 06:30, Joel Nothman a
écrit :
> Btw, consensus is defined by 2/3 of cast votes by core devs, according to
> our Governance. https://scikit-learn.org/dev/about.html#authors lists 20
> core devs.
>
> That is, we could consider this resolved after 14 votes in
+1 for the geenralization of kw arguments.
This is obviously relevant for __init__ methods, why good old (X,y) should
remain positional.
Best,
Bertrand
> De: "Joel Nothman"
> À: "Scikit-learn mailing list"
> Envoyé: Lundi 16 Septembre 2019 15:28:57
> Objet: Re: [scikit-learn] Vote on
Btw, consensus is defined by 2/3 of cast votes by core devs, according to
our Governance. https://scikit-learn.org/dev/about.html#authors lists 20
core devs.
That is, we could consider this resolved after 14 votes in favour.
So far, if I've interpreted correctly:
+1 (adrin, nicolas, hanmin,
I vote +1
Hopefully keyword-only args become normalized and a future will come where
I won't see `x.sum(0)` anymore
VN
On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 11:23 PM Thomas J Fan wrote:
> +1 from me
>
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 8:12 AM Joel Nothman
> wrote:
>
>> I am +1 for this change.
>>
>> I agree that
