[Numpy-discussion] Response to PEP suggestions
rkern at ucsd.edu
Sat Feb 19 17:03:26 EST 2005
Colin J. Williams wrote:
> Robert Kern wrote:
>> konrad.hinsen at laposte.net wrote:
>>> It all depends on the reaction of the Python developer community. We
>>> won't know before asking.
>> I think it would be great to have a more thorough number hierarchy in
>> the standard library. So would some others. See PEPs 228 and 242.
>> However, I think that the issue is orthogonal getting an multiarray
>> object into the standard library. I'm not convinced that it actually
>> solves the problems with getting multiarrays into the core. Now, we
>> may have different priorities, so we have different thresholds of
> PEP 228 is under consideration (since 2000):
> Numerical Python Issues
> People who use Numerical Python do so for high-performance vector
> operations. Therefore, NumPy should keep its hardware based
> numeric model.
Note that the recommendation is that Numeric ignore PEP's number model.
That PEP points *away* from things like Int32 and Float64.
> For PEP 242 the status is:
> This PEP has been closed by the author. The kinds module will not
> be added to the standard library.
> There was no opposition to the proposal but only mild interest in
> using it, not enough to justify adding the module to the standard
> library. Instead, it will be made available as a separate
> distribution item at the Numerical Python site. At the next
> release of Numerical Python, it will no longer be a part of the
> Numeric distribution.
> It seems to be up to the numerical folk to make proposals.
Note also that PEP 242 was retracted before people got really interested
(by which I mean "interested enough to implement") in other number
types like decimal and rationals. While historically these proposal have
come from the NumPy community (which I'm distinguishing from "numerical
folk"), in the future they will need to intimately involve a much larger
group of people.
Of course, the NumPy community is a subset of "numerical folk," so we
are naturally interested in how numbers are represented in Python. I'm
not saying we shouldn't be or that such a proposal shouldn't come from
this community. In general, such a thing would be of great use to this
community. However, I don't see how it would help, in specific, the
addition of multiarray objects to the standard library, nor do I think
that such should wait upon the acceptance and implementation of such a
rkern at ucsd.edu
"In the fields of hell where the grass grows high
Are the graves of dreams allowed to die."
-- Richard Harter
More information about the NumPy-Discussion