[Numpy-discussion] LA improvements (was: dot function or dot notation, matrices, arrays?)

David Warde-Farley dwf@cs.toronto....
Wed Dec 23 16:26:17 CST 2009

On 23-Dec-09, at 2:19 PM, David Goldsmith wrote:

> Thanks Anne (and Dave): it may seem to you to be "a bit silly to dream
> up an API without implementing anything," but I think it's useful to
> get these things "on the record" so to speak, and as a person charged
> with being especially concerned w/ the doc, it's particularly
> important for me to hear when its specific deficiencies are
> productivity blockers...

In fact, there are gufuncs in the tests that are quite instructive and  
would form the basis of good documentation, though not enough of them  
to give a complete picture of what the generalized ufunc architecture  
can do (I remember looking for an example of a particular supported  
pattern and coming up short, though I can't for the life of me  
remember which).

The existing documentation, plus source code from the umath_tests  
module marked up descriptively (what all the parameters do, especially  
the ones which currently receive magic numbers) would probably be the  
way to go down the road.


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list