-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 300
Remove 'iris.analysis.coord_comparison' from public API. #3562
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
stephenworsley
merged 2 commits into
SciTools:master
from
pp-mo:remove_coord_comparison
Nov 27, 2019
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions
1
...c/whatsnew/contributions_3.0.0/incompatiblechange_2019-Nov-26_remove_coord_comparison.txt
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1 @@ | ||
| * The former function "iris.analysis.coord_comparison" has been removed. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@pp-mo Awesome! 👍
My only suggestion here, before we commit to this, is questioning the name of this private function (all 30+ characters of it).
I'm just making the explicit point that it can be anything that we want - it's private. I'm all for meaningful, appropriate names, rather than those that are cryptic, abstract or obfuscated, but now is probably the time to suggest shorter alternatives? It is a bit of a mouthful, right? 😮
Any suggestions? Can I start the bun-fight with simply
_metadata_compare?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We just missed the boat on this.
I get the point, but I couldn't think of anything more concise and still clear.
Probably the term DimensionalMetadata is at fault here, also being a bit of a mouthful.
I guess we could have
_dm_comparison.Do you want to propose a post-fix in separate issue ?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@pp-mo @stephenworsley No worries. Naming a thing is the hardest part, strangely.
I recently asked @lbdreyer for an alternative name to
_DimensionalMetadata.... but we came up blank 😕This isn't a high priority, by any means, just wanted to raise it as an obvious point to consider. We can stick with what we've got, and change at a later date in a follow-up PR, if we have an epiphany 💡 with agreement