[Numpy-discussion] packaging scipy (was Re: Simple financial functions for NumPy)
Perry Greenfield
perry@stsci....
Mon Apr 7 17:03:56 CDT 2008
On Apr 7, 2008, at 5:54 PM, Brian Granger wrote:
>>
> The only problem is that if we keep adding things to numpy that could
> be in scipy, it will _never_ be clear to users where they can expect
> to find things. It is already bad enough. How do I explain to a
> user/student/scientist that ffts and linear algebra are in numpy, but
> that integration and interpolation are in scipy. That doesn't make
> any sense to them. Oh but wait, linear algebra and ffts are also in
> scipy! Random numbers - take a guess - wrong, they are in numpy.
>
> As far as I am concerned, financial fucntions are completely outside
> the conceptual scope that numpy has established = arrays, fft, linalg,
> random. In fact, they are far outside it. Simply putting things into
> numpy because of convenience (numpy is easier to install) only
> encourages people to never install or use scipy. If scipy that much
> of a pain to install and use - we should spend our time improving
> scipy.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Brian
>
To me, the biggest characteristic difference between the two is the
ease of installation. If installation weren't an issue, I would tell
everyone to use scipy and then the confusion would be ended. But the
installation issue is not trivial one to solve (if it were, we'd
already be there).
But a nice ideal is that the numpy namespace should map directly into
scipy's so that if I expected numpy.xxx to work, the scipy.xxx should
also work. That would lessen the confusion of finding things. If it
isn't in numpy, it's in scipy. But otherwise one is a subset of the
other. (I say this from complete ignorance, I'm not sure what
prevents this, and there may be very good reasons why this can't be
done).
Perry
More information about the Numpy-discussion
mailing list