On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Mark Wiebe <mwwi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 5:27 AM, Tom Aldcroft < >> aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Ilan Schnell <ischn...@enthought.com> >>> wrote: >>> > Hi Chuck, >>> > >>> > thanks for the prompt reply. I as curious because because >>> > someone was interested in adding >>> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Quaternion >>> > to EPD, but Martin and Mark's implementation of quaternions >>> > looks much better. >>> >>> Hi - >>> >>> I'm a co-author of the above mentioned Quaternion package. I agree >>> the numpy_quaternion version would be better, but if there is no >>> expectation that it will move forward I can offer to improve our >>> Quaternion. A few months ago I played around with making it accept >>> arbitrary array inputs (with similar shape of course) to essentially >>> vectorize the transformations. We never got around to putting this in >>> a release because of a perceived lack of interest / priorities... If >>> this would be useful then let me know. >>> >>> >> Would you be interested in carrying Martin's package forward? I'm not >> opposed to having quaternions in numpy/scipy but there needs to be someone >> to push it and deal with problems if they come up. Martin's package >> disappeared in large part because Martin disappeared. I'd also like to hear >> from Mark about other aspects, as there was also a simple rational user >> type proposed that we were looking to put in as an extension 'test' type. >> IIRC, there were some needed fixes to Numpy, some of which were postponed >> in favor of larger changes. User types is one of the things we want ot get >> fixed up. >> > > I kind of like the idea of there being a package, separate from numpy, > which collects these dtypes together. To start, the quaternion and the > rational type could go in it, and eventually I think it would be nice to > move datetime64 there as well. Maybe it could be called numpy-dtypes, or > would a more creative name be better? > I'm trying to think about how that would be organized. We could create a new repository, numpy-user-types (numpy-extension-types), under the numpy umbrella. It would need documents and such as well as someone interested in maintaining it and making releases. A branch in the numpy repository wouldn't work since we would want to rebase it regularly. It could maybe go in scipy but a new package would need to be created there and it feels too distant from numpy for such basic types as datetime. Do you have thoughts about the details? Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
