On 06/10/06, Jon Peirce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Perhaps that is the best way to move forward along with the work on a > > "pylab" super-package. > > [...] > > But why not scipy? It seems the right name for a super-package.
It does, particularly if (as is being discussed) the current content of scipy might get subdivided into separately buildable modules (weave, fortran, non-fortran, say). scipy would then refer to the lot - numpy, matplotlib, weave, scipy-fortran, scipy-nonfortran, and any others that seem essential. Is setting out to create a "MATLAB replacement" a good goal? I think so. Really the goal should be to create a useful tool for scientists, but I think MATLAB is clearly already that, so (at first) it can serve as a definite objective. Of course, anyone who wants to make scipy *better* than MATLAB should be warmly encouraged... A. M. Archibald ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/numpy-discussion
