Sebastian Haase wrote:
Hi, Could we start another poll on this !?
I think I would vote +1 for complex32 & complex64 mostly just because of "that's what I'm used to"
+1 Most people look to the number to give a clue as to the precision of the value. Colin W.
But I'm curious to hear what others "know to be in use" - e.g. Matlab or IDL !
- Thanks Sebastian Haase
Travis Oliphant wrote:
Sebastian Haase wrote:
Tim Hochberg wrote: <snip>
This would work fine if repr were instead:
dtype([('x', float64), ('z', complex128)])
Anyway, this all seems reasonable to me at first glance. That said, I don't plan to work on this, I've got other fish to fry at the moment.
A new point: Please remind me (and probably others): when did it get decided to introduce 'complex128' to mean numarray's complex64 and the 'complex64' to mean numarray's complex32 ?
It was last February (i.e. 2005) when I first started posting regarding the new NumPy. I claimed it was more consistent to use actual bit-widths. A few people, including Perry, indicated they weren't opposed to the change and so I went ahead with it.
You can read relevant posts by searching on numpy-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
Discussions are always welcome. I suppose it's not too late to change something like this --- but it's getting there...
-Travis
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/numpy-discussion