As I've previously mentioned to Paul, I need a single precision version of 'interp()', so I can use it on large single precision arrays, without returning a double precision array.
In my own copy of NumPy, I've written such a routine, and added it to 'arrayfns.c '. Naturally, I want to see this functionality built into the official release, so I do not have to apply my own patches to new releases.
Can we decide how such single precision needs are accomodated? Should there be a keyword argument on the 'interp()' call, that calls the single precision version? Or should the caller invoke 'interpf()', rather than 'interp()?'
I don't much care what the solution looks like, as long as people agree that: 1) we need such functionality in NumPy.
2) we can establish a precedent on how single precision vs double precision methods are invoked.
Please let me know your opinions on how this should be resolved.
Shouldn't this be handled in the function and decided by the typecode of the parameters. Or put a typcode keyword parameter in the function signature of interp. To derive functions for different types and put these into the public namespace is not so good IMHO.
This could also be handled by a wrapper, which calls different the compiled _functions.