Revert renaming labels to tick_labels in boxplot_stats() #27916
Merged
+12
−18
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This is up for debate: I'm only +0.2 here.
The renaming was done in #27901, which renamed the parameter
labels
totick_labels
forboxplot()
andbxp()
.One can take two views here:
If
boxplot_stats()
is specifically for the input ofbxp()
, one can justify the renaming as being consistent with thebxp()
signature. Note however, that the returned dict still contains the key "label" for back-compatibility (There's no easy migration path for that). So, this brings us an inconsistency between the parameter name and the returned dict key.One can alternatively view
boxplot_stats()
as a generic function to define box parameters. Here, we'd only have a generallabel
for the boy and no information that this should be used as tick label.If we could make a clean transition and also rename the dict key, I would tend to go with the first view. But the inevitable inconsistency of the fist view let's me sway towards the second view, so that with the revert, we've effectively not touched
boxplot_stats()
.