Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

WIP: Change the signature of pick_random #155

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rogiervandergeer
Copy link
Collaborator

Parent pickers are no longer passed any kwargs. The pick_random must
now be initialised before use, the number of parents passed to it
upon initialization. In addition, pickers must always return a sequence
of picked parents - even if it is only one.

These changes make it much easier to implement more complex picking
algorithms, and in addition they remove the requirement for the
select_arguments() decorator, which hurts my eyes.

Parent pickers are no longer passed any kwargs. The pick_random must
now be initialised before use, the number of parents passed to it
upon initialization. In addition, pickers must always return a sequence
of picked parents - even if it is only one.

These changes make it much easier to implement more complex picking
algorithms, and in addition they remove the requirement for the
select_arguments() decorator, which hurts my eyes.
@koaning
Copy link
Contributor

koaning commented May 15, 2020

This does feel like a breaking change. Might a deprecation warning be a nice thing to add here?

@rogiervandergeer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This does feel like a breaking change. Might a deprecation warning be a nice thing to add here?

It is certainly is a breaking change. Hence it would probably be best to only publish this in v2.0. Adding a deprecation warning here doesn't make much sense: you'd be saying "this isn't going to work in the future, but you cannot do anything about it right now".

@koaning
Copy link
Contributor

koaning commented May 18, 2020

I can live with that. But since we're not at version 1 yet, is there a reason you immediately want to jump to 2?

@rogiervandergeer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

rogiervandergeer commented May 18, 2020 via email

@koaning
Copy link
Contributor

koaning commented May 18, 2020

@rogiervandergeer are there other changes we'd like to make for version 1? I mean ... version 1 is a milestone release.

@koaning
Copy link
Contributor

koaning commented May 18, 2020

One thing that I've been wondering about is that we may then also submit evol to this: https://joss.theoj.org/

@rogiervandergeer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

rogiervandergeer commented May 18, 2020 via email

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants