Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Remove deprecated shims from matplotlib 1.3 #8044

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Carreau
Copy link
Contributor

@Carreau Carreau commented Feb 8, 2017

None of these shims seem to be used in the codebase.


Found as a custom tools of mine choked on one of the function that did not had a signature.

None of these shims seem to be used in the codebase.
There is a couple of direct use of `_path` though.
@NelleV
Copy link
Member

NelleV commented Feb 8, 2017

The actual code remove seems to be missing.

@Carreau
Copy link
Contributor Author

Carreau commented Feb 8, 2017

The actual code remove seems to be missing.

No, the methods are used privately in a few places in the same file, or somewhere else (by referring directly to _path) in the codebase. (grepped each of them one by one). So basically it only remove aliases.

For example lib/matplotlib/collections.py uses ind = _path.point_in_path_collection(...) so while path.point_in_path_collection is deprecated, _path.point_in_path_collection is used and can't be removed.

I don't know if this use of _path.point_in_path_collection is the right way of doing it, but my guess is that the deprecation what meant to allow a refactoring of this code by wrapping all of the above in python wrappers and consider the function private.

Also weirdly the code are in .h files o_O and the module also have a _path_wrapper.cpp. I'm a bit too afraid to touch these.

@anntzer
Copy link
Contributor

anntzer commented Feb 8, 2017

This is a subset of #7771. I'd rather my PR gets merged as it removes more code and would need a rebase if this one gets merged first :)

@Carreau
Copy link
Contributor Author

Carreau commented Feb 8, 2017

This is a subset of #7771. I'd rather my PR gets merged as it removes more code and would need a rebase if this one gets merged first :)

Ah ! No problem, I missed it

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants