On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Joris De Ridder < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 04 Apr 2008, at 16:11, Travis E. Oliphant wrote: > > > <snip> > > 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. > > Isn't this something you want to avoid? Functionality in two different > packages: a small kit of functions in NumPy, and (eventually) another > large toolkit in scipy. One package only, would be more convenient I > think. > > I agree with Gaël that it's not really consistent with the NumPy/SciPy > philosophy either. :-). > So, I would prefer to see this nice functionality in SciPy rather than > in NumPy. > Agree. I also think that the idea of basic, pure python extensions is a good one. There is a lot of useful functionality that can be made available without adding Fortran packages to the mix. These packages could even be included as part of numpy but they should remain in a separate namespace. Chuck
_______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
