[Numpy-discussion] Generalized ufuncs?

Charles R Harris charlesr.harris@gmail....
Fri Aug 15 02:15:32 CDT 2008


On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 12:16 AM, Travis E. Oliphant <oliphant@enthought.com
> wrote:

>
> >
> > Numpy 1.2 is for documentation, bug fixes, and getting the new testing
> > framework in place. Discipline is called for if we are going to have
> > timely releases.
> We also agreed to a change in the C-API (or at least did not object too
> loudly).   I'm in favor of minimizing that sort of change.


I thought it a bit iffy, but didn't think it worth objecting to a single
change. But it seems to have been the top of the 'ol slippery slope.


>
> >
> >
> > Why not wait until after the release then?
> The biggest reason is that the patch requires changing the C-API and we
> are already doing that for 1.2.   I would rather not do it again for
> another 6 months at least.  I don't think we should make the patch wait
> that long.
>

Rushing to a deadline can have the unfortunate side effect of hasty
decisions and regret savored at leisure. But the most important thing is the
principal of least surprise. That is why it is important to publicise a
change *even if no one objects to it*.

Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://projects.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20080815/31e3a260/attachment.html 


More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list