Skip to content

Consider removing the parse_ iotools functions #2444

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

Open
kandersolar opened this issue Apr 23, 2025 · 0 comments
Open

Consider removing the parse_ iotools functions #2444

kandersolar opened this issue Apr 23, 2025 · 0 comments
Labels

Comments

@kandersolar
Copy link
Member

The read_ and parse_ iotools functions are largely redundant; read_ is a simple wrapper around parse_. It has been suggested to remove the parse_ functions and have read_ work with both file-like objects and filenames/URLs.

@AdamRJensen in #2326 (comment):

I think we should get rid of the parse functions which will significantly reduce duplicated documentation (if anything then make the parse functions private with little documentation).

and @wholmgren in #2378 (comment):

Are we also going to add support for buffers to read_nsrdb_psm4? I recommend moving forward with this PR API as is and if you want to take that on before the next release then go for it.

Also need to edit the docstring returns sections if this function becomes private.

I am +1 to getting rid of parse_. There is some discussion back in #842 that may be of interest.

If we go ahead with this, we should start with the parse_ function in pvlib.iools.psm4, as it has not been included in a release yet and thus does not need a deprecation period.

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant