[SciPy-dev] the scipy mission, include finite element solver

Dag Sverre Seljebotn dagss@student.matnat.uio...
Fri Apr 10 03:46:41 CDT 2009

Prabhu Ramachandran wrote:
> On 04/09/09 18:04, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
>> The "workflow" of the average sciuentific programmer has a big potential
>> for improvement, and one cannot bring that about by further
>> fragmentation.
> I was not advocating fragmentation, any viable solution would be fine.
> IIRC, SPD itself is based on Sage and surely there will be some exchange
> of code/ideas between Sage and SPD at some time.  However, given a
> choice I would prefer a modular set of packages rather than one
> monolithic monster. I haven't delved into all the existing solutions

I just wanted to comment on the monolithic monster thing: It does have its
advantages too. For instance R is included and can be depended upon by any
Sage script.

I'd much rather spend some hundred MBs disk space to have all the open
source software science packages (like R) installed, and work on improving
e.g. the R-to-Python bridge, than, say, reimplement the vast amount of
algorithms available for R in Python just because "I like Python better
than R".

That's the upside to having a monolithic monster: It allows you to "build
the car instead of reinventing the wheel", using things regardless of the
implementation language. Without distributing all the software together
it's incredibly hard to have the different pieces fit together everywhere
(R would be a slightly incompatible version with RPy, etc. etc.)

Dag Sverre

More information about the Scipy-dev mailing list