On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 09:11:37AM -0500, Travis E. Oliphant wrote: > There are only two reasons that I can think of right now to keep them in > NumPy instead of moving them to SciPy.
> 1) These are "basic" functions and a scipy toolkit would contain much more. > 2) These are widely used and would make NumPy attractive to a wider > audience who don't want to install all of SciPy just to get > these functions. > NumPy already contains functions that make it equivalent to a basic > scientific calculator, should it not also contain the functions that > make it equivalent to the same calculator when placed in "financial" mode? My concern is consistency. It is already pretty hard to define what goes in scipy and what goes in numpy, and I am not even mentioning code lying around in pylab. I really thing numpy should be as thin as possible, so that you can really say that it is only an array manipulation package. This will also make it easier to sell as a core package for developpers who do not care about "calculator" features. My 2 cents, Gaël _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
