[Numpy-discussion] Numeric3
konrad.hinsen at laposte.net
konrad.hinsen at laposte.net
Mon Feb 7 01:57:23 CST 2005
On 06.02.2005, at 19:13, Andrew Straw wrote:
> While energy is put into re-coding an array package, I'd like to bring
> up an interesting idea brought up on matplotlib-users by Norbert
> Nemec: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=10528079
My summary of what he is saying is "define flexible enough interfaces,
and then people can write implementations the fit their needs". Which
is a very good idea.
Note that all his examples are cases where Python chose to use
functions where OO principles would suggest methods. If abs(), round(),
min() etc. were methods from the start, there wouldn't be any problem
to solve (of course they are not for a very good reason: notational
habit). The same applies to the math module or the ufunc module in
Numeric - there would be no need for ufunc if math simply defined
syntactic sugar for method calls.
I wonder if it is possible to come up with an abstract API for arrays
that would permit alternate implementations to be chosen as late as
possible, even at runtime. That could help to get over the
Numeric/numarray split.
Konrad.
More information about the Numpy-discussion
mailing list