On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 9:08 PM Stefan van der Walt <stefanv@berkeley.edu> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023, at 12:27, Ralf Gommers wrote:
Okay, as long as we keep in mind that it should contain all these not-for-main-namespace functions/classes, it seems fine with me. We can live with two namespaces (`types` and `exceptions`), but more would get a bit too much. We were planning to use `np.lib.*` for more detailed user-facing functions that didn't belong in the main namespace, so let's make sure that we don't end up with >2 of these kinds of namespaces right below the top level one.

If it's mainly for internal use, we can also use sub-namespaces under lib right now, and not add those to the main namespace with the next release? I.e., we can create `lib.types`, `lib.exceptions` and whatever we want, and then import lib as _np or similar internally.

It's not for internal use, the point of these proposals is to expose public namespaces that contain objects needed by third-party packages. So the current proposal seems better than throwing it into the `np.lib.*` mix.