[Numpy-discussion] in the NA discussion, what can we agree on?
Thu Nov 3 11:45:17 CDT 2011
On 11/2/11 7:16 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> By R compatibility, I specifically had in mind in-memory
The R crowd has had a big voice in this discussion, and I understand
that there are some nice lessons to be learned from it with regard to
the NA issues.
However, I think making R compatibility a priority is a mistake -- numpy
is numpy, it is NOT, nor should it be, an emulation of anything else. NA
functionality is useful to virtually everyone -- not just folks doing
R-like stuff, and even less so folks directly working with R.
> rpy2 provides a more-or-less seamless within-process
> interface between R and Python
Perhaps rpy2 will need to do some translating -- so be it, better than
crippling numpy for other uses.
That being said, if the R binary format is a good one for numpy, no harm
in using it, but I think that should be a secondary, at best, concern.
So should emulating the R API.
Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax
Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception
More information about the NumPy-Discussion