[Python-Dev] Re: [Numpy-discussion] Re: Numeric life as I see it

[Travis Oliphant]

>> One question we are pursuing is could the arrayobject get into the  
>> core without a particular ufunc object.   Most see this as  
>> sub-optimal, but maybe it is the only way.
>
>
> Since all the artithmetic operations are in ufunc that would be  
> suboptimal solution, but indeed still a workable one.


I think replacing basic number operations of the arrayobject should 
simple, so perhaps a default ufunc object could be worked out for 
inclusion.

>
>> I appreciate some of what Paul is saying here, but I'm not fully  
>> convinced that this is still true with Python 2.2 and up new-style  
>> c-types.   The concerns seem to be over the fact that you have to  
>> re-implement everything in the sub-class because the base-class will  
>> always return one of its objects instead of a sub-class object.
>
>
> I'd say that such discussions should be postponed until someone  
> proposes a good use for subclassing arrays. Matrices are not one, in 
> my  opinion.
>
Agreed.  It is is not critical to what I am doing, and I obviously need 
more understanding before tackling such things.  Numeric3 uses the new 
c-type largely because of the nice getsets table which is separate from 
the methods table.  This replaces the rather ugly C-functions getattr 
and setattr.

-Travis