[Numpy-discussion] Making NumPy accessible to everyone (or no-one) (was Numpy-discussion Digest, Vol 19, Issue 44)

[Alexander Michael]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 6:55 AM, Stéfan van der Walt <stefan at sun.ac.za> wrote:
> Hi Joe, all
>
>  On 10/04/2008, Joe Harrington <jh at physics.ucf.edu> wrote:
>  > > Absolutely.  Let's please standardize on:
>  >  > import numpy as np
>  >  > import scipy as sp
>  >
>  >  I hope we do NOT standardize on these abbreviations.  While a few may
>  >  have discussed it at a sprint, it hasn't seen broad discussion and
>  >  there are reasons to prefer the other practice (numpy as N, scipy as
>  >  S, pylab as P).
>
>  "N" is a very unfortunate choice of abbreviation, given that so many
>  algorithms use it to indicate the number of elements in things.  "np"
>  is much safer and, like Jarrod mentioned, also only takes two keys to
>  type.  Sebastian, a simple regexp replace should fix your problem
>  (investment in hundreds of lines of N.* usage).

Hey! I use np *all the time* as an abbreviation for "number of points". I don't
really see what the problem is with using numpy.whatever in library code and
published scripts and whatever you want in one-off throw-away scripts. It's easy
to setup a shortcut key in almost any editor to alleviate the typing burden, if
that is the main objection. If you have a section of an algorithm that you are
trying to make look as much like text-book pseudocode as possible, than you
can't do better than "from numpy import whatever" both for clarity and python
coding convention. You can also say "d = numpy.dot" in the local scope at the
top of your algorithm so you can write "d(x,y)" in the algorithm itself for very
pithy code that doesn't require a FAQ to understand.