search

JuliaData / DataFramesMeta.jl

Metaprogramming tools for DataFrames
https://juliadata.github.io/DataFramesMeta.jl/stable/
Other
481 stars 55 forks source link

Re-name `@with` #252

Open pdeffebach opened 3 years ago

pdeffebach commented 3 years ago

StaticModules.jl has a macro @with defined, and Infiltrator.jl is (maybe) defining a @with.

Ultimately @with just seems like too general a name for a macro that is so data-frames specific. It's also hard to imagine a With.jl package we could base this on because @with creates an anonymous function whereas a type-stable object can get by with just a let block.

bkamins commented 3 years ago

Do you have an idea for a better name? Essentially this is something like @dfscope but it seems like a not a very nice name.

pdeffebach commented 3 years ago

Maybe @withcols is good?

Might be too late to switch at this point. And we seem to be the largest user of @with.

bkamins commented 3 years ago

Maybe just @withdf? then @with could be deprecated with a clearly announced plan for removal, e.g.:

pdeffebach commented 3 years ago

I would say @withcols rather than @withdf, I think.

bkamins commented 3 years ago

OK. This is a minor thing.

pdeffebach commented 3 years ago

Well, it's minor but if we decide to do it it would be the last change we make before 1.0, or a 0,7-esque pre-breaking release.

How should I figure out if I should go for it? Should I just go ahead?

bkamins commented 3 years ago

So maybe you can comment why you prefer @withcols over @withdf?

My thinking about @withdf is that we kind-of put df in the scope. I understand your for @withcols is that we kind-of put columns in the scope.

Right?

The benefit of @withdf is that it is a bit shorter to type and it is more clear that it is related to DataFrames.jl.

pdeffebach commented 3 years ago

The user will write @withcols df begin... so @withcols reads like a sentence, "With the columns of df ...". @withdf is redundant because the user will write @withdf df begin .... Also we've generally avoided using the term df in DataFrames functions, in favor of more descriptive names.

bkamins commented 3 years ago

OK. Let us go for @withcols

pdeffebach commented 3 years ago

Wait one final problem with @withcols. Right now you can do @withcols df @byrow begin, and for consistency with rtransform etc. we might want to have an @rwith for doing things by row. Maybe this will be called @withrows. That in turn, breaks the consistency with @rselect, @rtransform etc.

Maybe we are being overly defensive? There are no seriously competing packages using @with right now.

I think we should wait until someone actually files an issue for a conflict with @with to make this change.

bkamins commented 3 years ago

OK - I am ok to keep @with. The uses you have noted are not likely to be conflicting.

pdeffebach commented 3 years ago

Sounds good. I have filed #278 and cc'd Mason. Hopefully it will be on everyone's radar at least and worry about re-naming later.