On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 at 10:36, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 12:26 AM Stefan van der Walt <stef...@berkeley.edu> > wrote: >> >> Ralf has been working towards this idea, but having a well-organised >> namespace of utility functions outside of the core NumPy API would be >> helpful in allowing expansion and experimentation, without making the >> current situation worse (where we effectively have to support things >> forever). As an example, take Cartesian product [0] and array combinations >> [1], which have been requested several times on StackOverflow, but there's >> nowhere to put them. > > This is a good point. If we could put it in `numpy.lib` without it bleeding > into the main namespace, saying yes here would be easier. Maybe we can give > it a conditional yes based on that namespace reorganization?
As an aside is this numpy.lib idea explained anywhere? I've been thinking about something possibly similar for sympy which also has a bloated top-level namespace (and has no other place for public API to go). Oscar _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
