On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:22 AM Hameer Abbasi <einstein.edi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> May I propose an alternative that was already discussed, and one that I > think everyone will be okay with: > That's a dangerous assumption on this list:) We put all overridable functions inside a new submodule, numpy.api, that > will initially be a shallow-ish copy of the numpy module. > This is not desirable. There are projects (e.g. statsmodels) that have added a .api submodule before. It's generally considered not a good idea, it's not very Pythonic. Everything one can import that doesn't have an underscore is normally part of the API of a package. In this particular case, I definitely prefer an envvar and relying on what is documented as part of __array_function__ rather than a new namespace. Cheers, Ralf I say ish because all modules inside NumPy will need to be shallow-copied > as well. If we need to add __array_function__, we can always do that there. > Normal users are using “regular” NumPy unless they know they’re using the > API, but it is separately accessible. As for hiding it completely goes: We > have to realise, the Python computation landscape is fragmenting. The > slower we are, the more fragmented it will become. NumPy already isn’t “the > standard” for machine learning. > > Regards, > Hameer Abbasi > >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
