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

Charles R Harris charlesr.harris@gmail....
Mon Apr 7 16:28:35 CDT 2008


On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Stéfan van der Walt <stefan@sun.ac.za>
wrote:

> On 07/04/2008, Andreas Klöckner <lists@informa.tiker.net> wrote:
> > On Montag 07 April 2008, Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
> >  > I wouldn't exactly call 494 functions "just enough namespace
> clutter";
> >  >  I'd much prefer to have a clean api to work with.
> >
> >
> > Not to bicker, but...
> >
> >  >>> import numpy
> >  >>> len(dir(numpy))
> >  494
>
> You'd be glad to know that that your investment increased as of r4964:
>
> 494 -> 504
> 251 -> 258
> 88 -> 89
> 69 -> 71
>
> >  I honestly don't see much of a problem.
>
> I see at least two:
>
> a) These numbers are growing (albeit slowly) and
> b) numpy.TAB under IPython shows 516 completions
>
> It doesn't matter *what* these completions are -- they're still there.
>  Sifting through 500 options isn't fun -- not for a newbie, nor a
> salty old sailor.  I agree with Joe that the problem can be
> ameliorated by documentation, but I do think that an (optional)
> fundamental restructuring is ultimately useful.
>

Yeah, dir needs to print in two columns ;)

I think we could use an apropos sort of function that indexes the
documentation, making it easier to find relevant functions. Apart from that,
I think we should stop adding to the numpy namespace. Polynomials, financial
functions, image processing, all that is nice to have around, but I don't
think it belongs in the top level.

Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://projects.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20080407/db1cc620/attachment.html 


More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list