southey at uiuc.edu
Sat Feb 5 19:28:10 EST 2005
I am not the developer of any of Numpy (in any form) so take my thoughts 'with a
grain of salt' because I am not doing the coding. I am really very thankful that
people have developed Numeric and numarray for Python!
Many of the comments I fully agree with especially on installation. Large
packages, like SciPy, require time and effort to ensure every thing works. Also,
various platforms lack compilers (i.e. MS Windows are not by default and free
Fortran 90 compilers for Linux). A user without 'system admin' experience or
access can not be expected get these compilers installed especially if the
dependencies don't compile or are incorrectly compiled.
With all the arguments that have been presented so far, I fail to see any need
for at least a third Python numerical option, especially one that may not
support many needs. This discussion shows that there doesn't seem to be the
'maturity' of the code base to justify a push towards the Python Standard
Library. By maturity, I mean that there are still too many differences between
Numeric and numarray that, while appear to be solvable, are not trivial to
address at the present time. (This is also one of the main reasons why many
different versions of the same thing exist.)
I would like to see a single NumPy option that everyone can use. If numarray or
Numeric3 does that then great as I will support either. However, I do fall in
the numarray camp as I do tend to work with large matrices (plus features like
Masked Arrays are a big plus).
More information about the NumPy-Discussion