Martin v. Löwis wrote: The PEP should list the options, include criteria
for selection, and then propose a choice. People can then discuss whether the list of options is complete (if not, you need to extend it), whether the criteria are agreed (they might be not, and there might be difficult consensus, which the PEP should point out), and whether the choice is the right one given the criteria (there should be no debate about this - everybody should agree factually that the choice meets the criteria best).
Unrealistic. I think it is undisputed that there are people with irreconcilably different needs. Frankly, we spent many, many months on the design of Numeric and it represents a set of compromises already. However, the one thing it wouldn't compromise on was speed, even at the expense of safety. A community exists that cannot live with this compromise. We were told that the Python core could also not live with that compromise.
Over the years there was pressure to add safety, convenience, flexibility, etc., all sometimes incompatible with speed. Numarray represents in some sense the set of compromises in that direction, besides its technical innovations. Numeric / Numeric3 represents the need for speed camp.
I think it is reasonable to suppose that the need for speed piece can be wrapped suitably by the need for safety-flexibility-convenience facilities. I believe that hope underlies Travis' plan.
The Nummies (the official set of developers) thought that the Numeric code base was an unsuitable basis for further development. There was no dissent about that at least. My idea was to get something like what Travis is now doing done to replace it. I felt it important to get myself out of the picture after five years as the lead developer especially since my day job had ceased to involve using Numeric.
However, removing my cork from the bottle released the unresolved pressure between these two camps. My plan for transition failed. I thought I had consensus on the goal and in fact it wasn't really there. Everyone is perfectly good-willed and clever and trying hard to "all just get along", but the goal was lost. Eric Raymond should write a book about it called "Bumbled Bazaar".
I hope everyone will still try to achieve that goal. Interoperability of all the Numeric-related software (including supporting a 'default' plotting package) is required.
Aside: While I am at it, let me reiterate what I have said to the other developers privately: there is NO value to inheriting from the array class. Don't try to achieve that capability if it costs anything, even just effort, because it buys you nothing. Those of you who keep remarking on this as if it would simply haven't thought it through IMHO. It sounds so intellectually appealing that David Ascher and I had a version of Numeric that almost did it before we realized our folly.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
