Hi Stefan, On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:26 PM Stefan van der Walt <stefanv@berkeley.edu> wrote:
Hi Marten,
Third, we could actual implementing the logical groupings identified in
On Sat, 01 Jun 2019 12:11:38 -0400, Marten van Kerkwijk wrote: the
code base (and describing them!). Currently, it is a mess: for the C files, I typically have to grep to even find where things are done, and while for the functions defined in python files that is not necessary, many have historical rather than logical groupings (looking at you, `from_numeric`!), and even more descriptive ones like `shape_base` are split over `lib` and `core`. I think it would help everybody if we went to a python-like layout, with a true core and libraries such as polynomial, fft, ma, etc.
How hard do you think it would be to address this issue? You seem to have some notion of which pain points should be prioritized, and it might be useful to jot those down somewhere (tracking issue on GitHub?).
The python side would, I think, not be too hard. But I don't really have that much of a notion - it would very much be informed by making a list first. For the C parts, I feel even more at a loss: one really would have to start with a summary of what is actually there (and I think the organization may well be quite logical already; I've not so felt it was wrong as in need of an overview). Somewhat of an aside, but relevant for the general discussion: updating/rewriting the user documentation may well be the best *first* step. It certainly doesn't hurt to try to make some list now, but my guess that the best one will emerge only when one tries to summarize what a new user should know/understand. All the best, Marten