[Numpy-discussion] Making NumPy accessible to everyone (or no-one) (was Numpy-discussion Digest, Vol 19, Issue 44)
Thu Apr 10 07:37:29 CDT 2008
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 6:55 AM, Stéfan van der Walt <email@example.com> wrote:
> Hi Joe, all
> On 10/04/2008, Joe Harrington <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > Absolutely. Let's please standardize on:
> > > import numpy as np
> > > import scipy as sp
> > I hope we do NOT standardize on these abbreviations. While a few may
> > have discussed it at a sprint, it hasn't seen broad discussion and
> > there are reasons to prefer the other practice (numpy as N, scipy as
> > S, pylab as P).
> "N" is a very unfortunate choice of abbreviation, given that so many
> algorithms use it to indicate the number of elements in things. "np"
> is much safer and, like Jarrod mentioned, also only takes two keys to
> type. Sebastian, a simple regexp replace should fix your problem
> (investment in hundreds of lines of N.* usage).
Hey! I use np *all the time* as an abbreviation for "number of points". I don't
really see what the problem is with using numpy.whatever in library code and
published scripts and whatever you want in one-off throw-away scripts. It's easy
to setup a shortcut key in almost any editor to alleviate the typing burden, if
that is the main objection. If you have a section of an algorithm that you are
trying to make look as much like text-book pseudocode as possible, than you
can't do better than "from numpy import whatever" both for clarity and python
coding convention. You can also say "d = numpy.dot" in the local scope at the
top of your algorithm so you can write "d(x,y)" in the algorithm itself for very
pithy code that doesn't require a FAQ to understand.
More information about the Numpy-discussion