[Numpy-discussion] packaging scipy (was Re: Simple financial functions for NumPy)

Travis E. Oliphant oliphant@enthought....
Mon Apr 7 15:52:45 CDT 2008


> I wouldn't exactly call 494 functions "just enough namespace clutter";
>  I'd much prefer to have a clean api to work with
I don't know.  The 494 functions do not seem like many to me.   
Apparently, I tend to come down in the "flat earth society" although I 
do like some structure (after all that's why numpy has numpy.linalg and 
numpy.fft).   I don't think this is the most pressing issue we are facing.
> Would it therefore make sense to
>
> a) Reorganise numpy to expose functionality as numpy.api.*
> b) Do a series of imports in numpy.__init__ which pulls in from numpy.api.
>
> This way, numpy.* would look exactly as it does now, bar the added member 'api'.
>   
This discussion is interesting, but it is really better suited for 1.1, 
isn't it? 

-0 on adding the .api name in 1.0.5

-Travis








More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list