On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 14:49, Charles R Harris > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 00:23, Charles R Harris > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > Hi All, > >> > > >> > numpy.linalg has qr and cholesky factorizations, but LU factorization > is > >> > only available in scipy. That doesn't seem quite right. I think is > would > >> > make sense to include the LU factorization in numpy among the basic > >> > linalg > >> > operations, and probably LU_solve also. Thoughts? > >> > >> -1. As far as I am concerned, numpy.linalg exists because Numeric had > >> LinearAlgebra, and we had to provide it to allow people to upgrade. I > >> do not want to see an expansion of functionality to maintain. > > > > I would be happier with that argument if scipy was broken into separately > > downloadable modules and released on a regular schedule. > > Then that is the deficiency that we should spend time on, not > duplicating the functionality again. > Should we break out the linear algebra part of scipy and make it a separate package? I suspect that would add to the build burden, because we would then have a new package to maintain and release binaries for. I don't see the problem with having a bit of linear algebra as part of the numpy base package. My own feeling is that numpy isn't the bare core of array functionality, rather it is the elementary or student version with enough functionality to be useful while scipy adds advanced features that commercial packages would charge extra for. To some extent this is also a matter of hierarchy, as numpy includes functions used by packages further up the food chain. Chuck
_______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
