Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> There's been comparatively little debate about Kurt's project, so I'm  
>> not sure why this proposal was so much more controversial.
> 
> My reaction emerged because Dag failed to provide enough information in the
> CEP(s) to clear up the implications. He left them out because he knew what
> he was talking about anyway, but I literally had to pull the details (even
> goals!) out of his fingers one by one before they even received mention in
> the CEP. And the more details I saw, the more I got the feeling that this

This critisicm is all true, and I hope I'm wiser until the next time I 
propose something.

To my defense it wasn't intentional, and it resulted from having gone 
over the details some times before on the mailing list in 
numerically-oriented threads which you weren't involved in. NumPy users 
understood what I was getting at much quicker -- but the CEP, as I 
presented it, definitely wasn't ready to be presented to people not 
familiar with NumPy, which means it wasn't ready for discussion by the 
Cython community at large -- we shouldn't be assuming NumPy familiarity 
in here.

It wasn't until very late I realized you hadn't used NumPy at all -- 
which of course was a major mistake from my side.

Apologies.

-- 
Dag Sverre
_______________________________________________
Cython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev

Reply via email to