[Numpy-discussion] Re: Vote: complex64 vs complex128

Arnd Baecker arnd.baecker at web.de
Mon Apr 3 23:36:00 CDT 2006


On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, Robert Kern wrote:

> Sebastian Haase wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Could we start another poll on this !?
>
> Please, let's leave voting as a method of last resort.
>
> > I think I would vote
> > +1  for complex32 & complex64  mostly just because of "that's what I'm
> > used to"
> >
> > But I'm curious to hear what others "know to be in use" - e.g. Matlab or
> > IDL !
>
> On the merits of the issue, I like the new scheme better. For whatever reason, I
> tend to remember it when coding. With Numeric, I would frequently second-guess
> myself and go to the prompt and tab-complete to look at all of the options and
> reason out the one I wanted.

In order to get an opionion on the subject:
How would one presently find out about
the meaning of  complex64 and complex128?
The following attempt does not help:

In [1]:import numpy
In [2]:numpy.complex64?
Type:           type
Base Class:     <type 'type'>
String Form:    <type 'complex64scalar'>
Namespace:      Interactive
Docstring:
    <no docstring>

In [3]:numpy.complex128?
Type:           type
Base Class:     <type 'type'>
String Form:    <type 'complex128scalar'>
Namespace:      Interactive
Docstring:
    <no docstring>

I also looked in Travis' "Guide to NumPy",
where the different types are discussed on
page 18 (referring to the sample chapters at
http://www.tramy.us/guidetoscipy.html)
Maybe chapter 12 contains more info on this ((our library
was still not able to buy the 20 copies since this request was
approved a month ago ...))

Best, Arnd





More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list