-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 415
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
Remove "united" as meaning "having units" #2432
Conversation
Can't say I'm a huge fan of the introduction of "un-unit-ed" throughout. I think "has units", "unitless", or even just letting "quantities" imply units throughout as appropriate seems cleaner to me. |
In light of @dcamron comment and reviewing the Pint nomenclature, I think using quantity to signify an array with units is the way to go. Then anything without units could just be referred to as an array. This would also have the benefit of aligning with our use of xarray and |
Ok, I rewrote this to just avoid "unit[-]?ed" altogether. Lemme know what y'all think. |
Instead use "quantity" as the general concept, and otherwise clarify using the phrase "with units" or otherwise clarifying as needed.
🏁 Successfully backported as #2566. 🏁 |
Description Of Changes
"united" doesn't mean what we want it to in these contexts. Let's go with "unit-ed" at least. I am open to changing to things like "quantity with units" or...?
Checklist
[ ] Closes #xxxx[ ] Tests added[ ] Fully documented