[SciPy-Dev] removing netcdf_variable from netcdf.__all__
Tue Sep 13 13:06:02 CDT 2011
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 7:22 PM, Benjamin Root <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Ralf Gommers <
> email@example.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Benjamin Root <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Ralf Gommers <
>>> email@example.com> wrote:
>>>> Question for users of scipy.io.netcdf: did you ever use netcdf_variable
>>>> directly, or only via netcdf_file.createVariable? The documentation says
>>>> that the latter is the only intended use, which means that this class
>>>> shouldn't be in __all__. https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/67 removes
>>>> it (and changes its __init__ in a non-backwards compatible way) - the patch
>>>> looks correct but I want to double check that no one is using this class.
>>> Sorry for not replying earlier (I don't regularly track this list). No,
>>> I don't use netcdf_variable directly. However, would the documentation for
>>> the class's other methods still show up in the main documentation if you
>>> remove it from __all__?
>>> It should, since the io module docstring contains:
>> Netcdf (:mod:`scipy.io.netcdf`)
>> .. module:: scipy.io.netcdf
>> .. autosummary::
>> :toctree: generated/
>> netcdf_file - A file object for NetCDF data
>> netcdf_variable - A data object for the netcdf module
> Ok, I am fine with that. However, if we have this change in the call
> signature, I would still feel better having a little note in the docstring
> pointing out that change in case there was someone who was using this
> constructor directly.
> I am still a little wary of how the change to the call signature of the
> constructor was done. In particular, I am not exactly sure why it would
> even be needed in the first place. For each NC_* type, there is only one
> element size that is valid, and each dtype character code should only
> correspond to a single NC_* type (and vice-versa). Why not have a dict of
> character code to element size, and just let the character code determine
> the item size?
> Or, maybe I am misunderstanding what is going on. I will also double-check
> on my 32 and 64 bit machines to make sure that everything works as expected.
> Discussion about this is at https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/51
It clearly was broken before, size is platform dependent. If you find a
cleaner way to fix the bug, it's not too late to undo this change.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the SciPy-Dev