On Fri, 25 Mar 2005, Travis Oliphant wrote:
For example, if a developer uses scipyfortran package in a package, it immidiately reduces the number of >potential users for this package.
While I'm not in love with my suggestion and would prefer to see better ones put forward, wouldn't any system that uses routines not available unless you have a fortran-compiled package installed be a problem? I was just proposing not "hiding" this from the developer but making it explicit.
What do you propose to do for those situations? I was just proposing putting them in a separate hierarchy so the developer is aware he is using something that requires fortran. I actually think that it's somewhat of a non-issue myself, and feel that people who don't have fortran compilers will look for binaries anyway.
Such an situation can be avoided if a package is extended with new wrappers parallel for all backend cases. For example, when adding a new interface to a lapack routine then to the scipy_base sources must be added both Fortran and f2c versions of the corresponding routine. Pearu