[Numpy-discussion] Change in scalar upcasting rules for 1.6.x?
Tue Feb 14 14:14:52 CST 2012
On Feb 14, 2012, at 7:04 AM, Henry Gomersall wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 22:56 -0600, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>> But, I am also aware of *a lot* of users who never voice their opinion
>> on this list, and a lot of features that they want and need and are
>> currently working around the limitations of NumPy to get. These are
>> going to be my primary focus for the rest of the 1.X series.
> Is that a prompt for feedback? :)
Absolutely. That's the reason I'm getting more active on this list. But, at the same time, we all need to be aware of the tens of thousands of users of NumPy who don't use the mailing list and who need a better way to communicate their voice.
Even while I have not been active on the mailing list, I have had a chance to communicate with, work with, and collaborate with hundreds of those users and hear about their needs, use-cases, and requirements. It has given me a fairly broad perspective on where particular corners cut in delivery of NumPy 1.0 need to be smoothed off, and where easy-to-add, but essential missing features could be proposed.
Some of these have been proposed already, and others will be proposed throughout this year. I look forward to the discussion.
> (btw, whilst the back slapping is going on, I think Python and Numpy in
> conjunction with Cython is just how software should be developed
> nowadays. It truly is a wonderful and winning combo. So a huge thanks to
> all the developers for making the world a better place.)
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
More information about the NumPy-Discussion