On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Travis Oliphant<oliph...@enthought.com> wrote: > > On Aug 20, 2009, at 2:04 PM, David Cournapeau wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Christopher >> Hanley<chan...@stsci.edu> wrote: >> >>> >>> Another concern is that we told people coming from numarray to use >>> this module. It is my opinion that at this point in the numpy >>> release >>> cycle that an API change needs a very strong justification. >>> Anecdotes >>> about the number of users, a "change or die" philosophy, and an un- >>> articulated notion of "the spirit of numpy" do not in my >>> consideration meet that high bar. >> >> I agree those are not strong reasons without more backing. What >> worries me the most, in both numpy and scipy, is code that nobody >> knows about, without any test or documentation. When it breaks, we >> can't fix it. That's unsustainable in the long term, because it takes >> a lot of time that people could spend somewhere else more useful. >> Especially when you have C code which does not work on some platforms, >> with new version of python (python 3k port, for example). > > > The claim that "chararray" is not understood is not true. I know > about the code. It's not that difficult of a piece of code. It's > utility can be questioned, but it was and may still be an important > part of Numarray compatibilty.
I did not want to imply that chararray is unknown, sorry for the confusion. I just wanted to say that old code is not an argument to remove something. Whether someone is willing to maintain it is a much better argument IMO. cheers, David _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion