[Numpy-discussion] in the NA discussion, what can we agree on?
Thu Nov 3 14:02:38 CDT 2011
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Chris.Barker <Chris.Barker@noaa.gov> wrote:
> 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.
I think we agree, actually. What I currently have written on the wiki
page is "In-memory compatibility with R would be handy", which is
intended to convey that all else being equal this is a desirable
feature, but that it's not worth crippling numpy (as you put it) to
get. Do you have a suggestion about how I could make this clearer? or
am I misunderstanding your point?
More information about the NumPy-Discussion