So would we regard a hard-copy of the users guide or reference manual for such a spreadsheet as sufficiently "permanent" to pass muster for use as a reference?
DG --- On Mon, 6/8/09, Alan G Isaac <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Alan G Isaac <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] Definitions of pv, fv, nper, pmt, and rate > To: "Discussion of Numerical Python" <[email protected]> > Date: Monday, June 8, 2009, 8:40 PM > On 6/8/2009 11:18 PM David Goldsmith > apparently wrote: > > I formally "move" that numpy.financial (or at least > that > > subset of it consisting of functions which are > commonly > > subject to multiple definitions) be moved out of > numpy. > > > > My recollection is that Travis O. added this with the > explicit intent of seducing users who might otherwise > turn to spreadsheets for such functionality. I.e., > it was part of an effort to extend the net of the NumPy > community. > > I am not urging a case one way or another, although I am > very sympathetic to that reasoning, whether or not I am > correctly recalling the actual motivation. > > In that light, however, standard spreadsheet definitions > would be the proper guide. E.g., the definitions used > by > Gnumeric. > > Cheers, > Alan Isaac > > > _______________________________________________ > Numpy-discussion mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
