I like the thoughts on core-architecture. These are all things that we were not able to do as part of the NumPy for .NET discussions, but with the right interested parties could be acted upon.
> > I like the lower two levels if, as I assume, they are basically aimed at > allocating, deallocating blocks of memory (or equivalent) and doing basic > manipulations such as dealing with endianess and casting. Where do you see > array methods making an appearance? > > That's correct. Currently, for example, the cast functions take array objects > as parameters, something that would no longer be the case. The array methods > vs functions only shows up in the Python exposure, I believe. The above > structure only affects the C library, and how its exposed to Python could > remain as it is now. Right now, the reason the array objects are passed to the cast functions is because variable-sized data-types need the elsize information that comes from the array structure. This could be handled differently, of course, but the low-levels will need some way of passing variable information like this. For some data-types you know the size exactly, for others it's a parameter. > > The original Numeric only had three (IIRC) rather basic methods and > everything else was function based, an approach which is probably easier to > maintain. The extensive use of methods came from numarray and might be > something that could be added at a higher level so that the current ndarrays > would be objects combining ow level arrays and ufuncs. > > Sounds reasonable to me. I agree that the low-level objects should use a functional approach with very few methods. -Travis
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
