ENH: Rename internal DataFrame._append()

[Dr-Irv]

Feature Type

• Adding new functionality to pandas

• Changing existing functionality in pandas

• Removing existing functionality in pandas

Problem Description

This comment on the python discussion is interesting:
https://discuss.python.org/t/name-suggestions-for-attributeerrors-and-possibly-nameerrors-should-not-include-names-with-single-leading-underscores/48588

Example code (from main):

>>> pd.DataFrame.append()
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: type object 'DataFrame' has no attribute 'append'. Did you mean: '_append'?

What is happening is that the python interpreter is suggesting people use DataFrame._append() since we removed append()

Feature Description

I think if we renamed the internal _append() to something like _internal_append_do_not_use() then maybe the interpreter wouldn't do that suggestion.

Alternative Solutions

Bring back DataFrame.append() ???

Additional Context

No response

[rhshadrach]

Is the proposal to do this with all internal methods that are similar to removed external names? I'm pretty opposed here - I think we should be free to chose internal names however we see fit.

[Dr-Irv]

Is the proposal to do this with all internal methods that are similar to removed external names? I'm pretty opposed here - I think we should be free to chose internal names however we see fit.

No, but in this case, since we deprecated DataFrame.append(), we don't want people using DataFrame._append() as a workaround so we need to hide it better.

[asishm]

I'd me somewhat +1 - see this SO answer -https://stackoverflow.com/a/76449334/2214597
while it does have a disclaimer, it's still pretty heavily upvoted.

Nvm - this SO question is already mentioned in the Discourse thread

[mroeschke]

I would definitely wait until python/cpython#116871 has a resolution upstream before preemptively acting here.

[jbrockmendel]

Isn’t a fix in cpython going to take ages? I’d be fine with changing the name on our end

[rhshadrach]

No opposition if this is a unique case, but I'd like to not play whack-a-mole with the CPython interpreter and our internal names. That seems like too much code churn to me.

[Dr-Irv]

No opposition if this is a unique case, but I'd like to not play whack-a-mole with the CPython interpreter and our internal names. That seems like too much code churn to me.

I think the issue here is that we used to have DataFrame.append(), and now CPython is suggesting DataFrame._append(), so people are using it. If we remove methods in the future, then we should be aware of the similarity of the removed name with any "private" methods.