[SciPy-user] Inconsistent standard deviation and variance implementation in scipy vs. scipy.stats

Sebastian Haase haase@msg.ucsf....
Mon Oct 6 13:59:39 CDT 2008

On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 8:34 PM, Anne Archibald
<peridot.faceted@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/10/6 Stéfan van der Walt <stefan@sun.ac.za>:
>> 2008/9/26 David Cournapeau <cournape@gmail.com>:
>>> Yes, it would be nice. What do other people think about deprecating
>>> all the numpy re-export in scipy ? It would be nice to do for 0.7
>>> (e.g. in 0.7, deprecated, in 0.8, removed).
>> There were no objections to this, so may we go ahead?
> My only concern is possible user confusion: some functions (e.g. sqrt)
> are provided as "enhanced" versions in scipy, while others are simply
> reexported. If we remove the reexports, users can't simply use
> scipy.whatever to get the best-available version of each function,
> they have to know whether an enhanced version exists. Of course, since
> the enhanced versions exist because their APIs differ in important and
> possibly surprising ways (e.g., sqrt(-1) has a different return type
> from sqrt(1)) this may be a good thing.
Arguing that SciPy is below 1.0 I think the reexporting should be
minimized as much as possible.
I don't thing that some people's preference for
"from scipy import *"
(without a preceding "from numpy import *") should not be a deciding point.

It would be nice if it were clear enough (in general) if a given
function should be expected to part of numpy or part of scipy.
Left over uncertainties should get documented is a short form - a list maybe.
My two cents....
-Sebastian Haase

More information about the SciPy-user mailing list