[Numpy-discussion] Home for pyhdf5io?
Mon May 25 13:29:25 CDT 2009
Francesc Alted wrote:
> A Monday 25 May 2009 19:55:28 Eric Firing escrigué:
>>>> If the aim is to come up with a method of saving numpy arrays that uses
>>>> a standard protocol and does not introduce large dependencies, then
>>>> could this be accomplished using netcdf instead of hdf5, specifically
>>>> Roberto De Almeida's pupynere, which is already in scipy.io as
>>>> netcdf.py? Or does hdf5 have essential characteristics for this purpose
>>>> that netcdf lacks?
> After looking a bit at the code of pupynere, there is the next line:
> assert magic == 'CDF', "Error: %s is not a valid NetCDF 3 file" %
> So, the current version of pupynere is definitely for version 3 of NetCDF, not
> version 4.
Yes, and I presume it will stay that way--which is fine for the question
I am asking above. I should have said "netcdf3" explicitly. Its
simplicity compared to hdf5 and netcdf4 is potentially a virtue.
The question is, is it *too* simple for the intended purpose?
>>> >From what I understand, netCFD is based on on HDF5, at least as of the
>>> version 4 release.
>> Netcdf4 is indeed built on hdf5, but netcdf3 is not, and netcdf3 format
>> is likely to stick around for a *very* long time. The netcdf4 library
>> is backwards-compatible with netcdf3.
> NetCDF4 is backwards-compatible with NetCDF3 just at API level, not the file
> format. NetCDF3 has a much more simple format, and completely different from
> NetCDF4, which is based on HDF5.
Yes, but the netcdf4 *library* includes full netcdf3 compatibility; you
can read and write netcdf3 using the netcdf4 library. For example, you
can build Jeff Whitaker's http://code.google.com/p/netcdf4-python/ with
all the hdf5 bells and whistles, and it will still happily read and,
upon request, write netcdf3 files.
More information about the Numpy-discussion