I'm wondering if set is now a bad name for pylab to be using?
> +1 for changing it.
> I've also had this issue bite me when I was hacking together
> some code and wanted to use a python set. I'd be in favour of
> changing the pylab set to be called something else, although
> I don't have any good suggestions about what to change it
Ouch, I hadn't thought of this. In the past, consensus has been that
pylab should not override built-ins, eg the previous discussion on
min/max which led us to rename these functions to amin/amax. Changing
set, unfortunately, will break a lot of scripts. I think the best
plan of action is to define a new function pset or setp (setp for "set
property") which has the functionality of the old, and keep set around
for a release or two issuing a warning with a line number so people
can get their existing scripts cleaned up.