[Numpy-discussion] Re: [SciPy-user] Current thoughts on future directions
Michiel Jan Laurens de Hoon
mdehoon at ims.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Thu Mar 10 19:18:11 EST 2005
Perry Greenfield wrote:
> On Mar 9, 2005, at 11:41 PM, eric jones wrote:
>> 2. I do question whether weave really be in this core? I think it was
>> in scipy_core before because it was needed to build some of scipy.
>> 3. Now that I think about it, I also wonder if f2py should really be
>> there -- especially since we are explicitly removing any fortran
>> dependencies from the core.
> It would seem to me that so long as:
> 1) both these tools have very general usefulness (and I think they do), and
> 2) are not installation problems (I don't believe they are since they
> themselves don't require any compilation of Fortran, C++ or whatever--am
> I wrong on that?)
> That they are perfectly fine to go into the core. In fact, if they are
> used by any of the extra packages, they should be in the core to
> eliminate the extra step in the installation of those packages.
1) In der Beschraenkung zeigt sich der Meister. In other words, avoid
2) f2py is a Fortran-Python interface generator, once the interface is
created there is no need for the generator.
3) I'm sure f2py is useful, but I doubt that it has very general
usefulness. There are lots of other useful Python packages, but we're
not including them in scipy-core either.
4) f2py and weave don't fit in well with the rest of scipy-core, which
is mainly standard numerical algorithms.
More information about the NumPy-Discussion