On Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 4:51:00 PM UTC+2, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > > Just to clarify my position, I'm all for better and more generic APIs, but > until we come up with such and have implementations for them, legacy names > like sprandn aren't hurting anyone – they get the job done and they're what > many people using sparse matrices are familiar with. If you want to improve > the state of affairs, the best approach is not to complain about it, but to > design something better, get some feedback, and implement it. >
As some people have noticed, I am a new user, and I don't have an overview of the language. I only have an experience with Mathematica ans the solution they use for their system which is closed to multiple dispatch. If Mathematica has such a nice consistency, it's mainly because someone has enforced a very strict policy (my guess is that Stephen Wolfram is this guy). I can help on designing numerical algorithms which is why I've coded a few lines for ODEs. That's my background. I don't have experience in designing guidelines, but my point is that I need them to feel comfortable in developing in Julia.
