[Numpy-discussion] Ransom Proposals

Colin J. Williams cjw at sympatico.ca
Sun Mar 26 06:28:04 CST 2006


Sasha wrote:

>On 3/26/06, Tim Hochberg <tim.hochberg at cox.net> wrote:
>  
>
>>...
>>That brings up another question: is the plan to keep oldnumeric around
>>forever, or is it going away eventually? If it is going away, then the
>>place to put these would be oldnumeric. Actually, it's OK if it sticks
>>around as long as it doesn't end up in the numpy namespace by default.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>It *is* in oldnumeric.  However, I don't really know what plans for
>oldnumeric are. Travis?
>  
>
An essential part of Ed's suggestion, as I understood it, was that the 
names in oldnumeric
would not be hauled into numpy.  The user could import oldnumeric as 
needed.  As time goes by,
the need will decline.

Some consideration might be given to extending this to other non-core 
packages.

This would reduce time required to handle basic core startup i.e. the 
elements
being proposed for inclusion in core Python 2.6.

Colin W.

>>...
>>be fine. Fine, as long as x.reshape behaves sensibly: does it always
>>return a view? You (Sasha) said something about it maybe sometimes
>>returning a copy. If so, that should be fixed.
>>    
>>
>
>I never said that. What I said was x.reshape(shape) returns x itself
>if shape==x.shape and a view othrwise.  This should probably be fixed
>because it may lead to inconsistent behavior of functions that
>manipulate metadata after reshape.
>
>  
>





More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list