+1 to deprecation On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Jason Grout <jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote: > > Nathann Cohen wrote: >> Hello everybody !!! >> >> Following >> http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/bfeb9b1828a04350/10681dbb1f189b2f, >> I created a patch to change predecessors/successors to neighbors_in and >> neighbors_out. >> >> It is available there : http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7157 >> >> Robert Miller thought it would be hard to just change these functions as >> some people may already have script using the old ones, which they would >> have to change if this patch was to be merged. >> >> Our question is then : >> * do we change them anyway ? >> * Do we keep the old ones as copies ? >> * Is there a good pythonic way to deprecate functions, and is this what >> we should do ? >> > > Do not just delete the functions. At least deprecate the functions > (there are lots of examples in the sage code of how to do this; just > search for "deprecation"). > > I'm okay with the functions sticking around and being aliases, since > they are such fundamental functions and are valid terminology. I'm also > okay with deprecating them if that's what everyone else thinks is best. > > Jason > > -- > Jason Grout > > > > >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
