[Numpy-discussion] Re: Vote: complex64 vs complex128
faltet at carabos.com
Tue Apr 4 11:46:08 CDT 2006
A Dimarts 04 Abril 2006 20:13, Joe Harrington va escriure:
> When I first heard of Complex128, my first response was, "Cool! I
> didn't even know there was a Double128!"
> Folks seem to agree that precision-based naming would be most
> intuitive to new users, but that length-based naming would be most
> intuitive to low-level programmers. This is a high-level package,
> whose purpose is to hide the numerical details and programming
> drudgery from the user as much as possible, while still offering high
> performance and not limiting capability too much. For this type of
> package, a good metric is "when it doesn't restrict capability, do
> what makes sense for new/naiive users".
> So, I favor Complex32 and Complex64. When you say "complex", everyone
> knows you mean 2 numbers. When you say 32 or 64 or 128, in the
> context of bits for floating values, almost everyone assumes you are
> talking that many bits of precision to represent one number. Consider
> future conversations about precision and data size. In precision
> discussions, you'd always have to clarify that complex128 had 64 bits
> of precision, just to make sure everyone was on the same key
> (particularly when 128-bit machines arrive). In data-size
> discussions, everyone would know to double the size for the two
> components. No extra clarification would be needed.
Well, from my point of view of "low-level" user, I don't specially
like this, but I understand the "high-level" position to be much more
important in terms of number of users. Besides, I also see that NumPy
should be adressed specially to the requirements of the later users.
So for me is fine with complex32/complex64.
>0,0< Francesc Altet http://www.carabos.com/
V V Cárabos Coop. V. Enjoy Data
More information about the Numpy-discussion