[Numpy-discussion] future directions

Fons Adriaensen fons@kokkinizita....
Thu Aug 27 16:49:56 CDT 2009

Some weeks ago there was a post on this list requesting feedback
on possible future directions for numpy. As I was quite busy at that
time I'll reply to it now.

My POV is that of a novice user, who at the same time wants quite
badly to use the numpy framework for his numerical work which in
this case is related to (some rather advanced) multichannell audio

>From that POV, I'd suggest the following:

1. Adopt an object based on Python-3's buffer protocol as the
basic array type. It's immensely more powerful than ndarray,
while at the same time it's close enough to ndarray to allow
a gradual adoption.

2. Adopting that format will make it even more important to
clearly define in which cases data gets copied and when not.
This should be based on some simple rules that can be evaluated
by a code author without requiring a lookup in the reference
docs each time.

3. Finally remove all the redundancy and legacy stuff from the
world of numerical Python. It is *very* confusing to a new user.

4. Ensure that each package deals with one problem area only.
For example a package that (by its name) suggests it provides
plotting facilities should provide only plotting facilities,
and not spectra, averages of all sorts, etc.

5. Ensure some consistency in style. Some numerical Python 
packages use two-character function names, some a have 
veryLongCamelCased names.

Just my two Eurocents of course. 


Io lo dico sempre: l'Italia è troppo stretta e lunga.

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list