Hi Travis, It is great that some resources can be spent to have people paid to work on NumPy. Thank you for making that happen.
I am slightly confused about roadmaps for numpy 1.8 and 2.0. This needs discussion on the ML, and our release manager currently is Ralf - he is the one who ultimately decides what goes when. I am also not completely comfortable by having a roadmap advertised to Pycon not coming from the community. regards, David On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Travis Oliphant <tra...@continuum.io> wrote: > For reference, here is the table that shows the actual changes between 1.5.1 > and 1.6.1 at least on 64-bit platforms in terms of type-casting. I updated > the comparison code to throw out changes that are just "spelling differences" > (i.e. where 1.6.1 chooses to create an output dtype with an 'L' character > code instead of a 'Q' which on 64-bit system is effectively the same). > > > > > Mostly I'm happy with the changes (after a cursory review). As I > expected, there are some real improvements. Of course, I haven't looked at > the changes that occur when the scalar being used does not fit in the range > of the array data-type. I don't see this change documented in the link that > Mark sent previously. Is it somewhere else? Also, it looks like > previously object arrays were returned for some coercions which now simply > fail. Is that an expected result? > > At this point, I'm not going to recommend changes to 1.7 to deal with these > type-casting changes --- at least this thread will serve to show some of what > changes occurred if it bites anyone in the future. > > However, I will have other changes to NumPy 1.X that I will be proposing and > writing (and directing other people to write as well). After some period of > quiet, this might be a refreshing change. But, not all may see it that way. > I'm confident that we can resolve any concerns people might have. Any > feature additions will preserve backward compatibility in NumPy 1.X. Mark > W. will be helping with some of these changes, but mostly he will be working > on NumPy 2.0 which we have tentatively targeted for next January. We have > a tentative target for NumPy 1.8 in June/July. So far, there are three > developers who will be working on NumPy 1.8 (me, Francesc Alted, and Bryan > Van de Ven). Mark Wiebe is slated to help us, as well, but I would like to > sponsor him as much as possible on the work for NumPy 2.0. If anyone else > would like to join us, please let me know off-list. There is room for > another talented person on our team. > > In addition to a few select features in NumPy 1.8 (a list of which will > follow in a later email), we will also be working on reviewing the list of > bugs on Trac and fixing them, writing tests, and improving docstrings. I > would also like to improve the state of the bug-tracker and get in place a > continuous integration system for NumPy. We will be advertising our NumPy > 1.8 roadmap and our NumPy 2.0 roadmap at PyCon, and are working on documents > that describe plans which we are hoping will be reviewed and discussed on > this list. > > I know that having more people working on the code-base for several months > will be a different scenario than what has transpired in the past. > Hopefully, this will be a productive time for everybody and our sometimes > different perspectives will be able to coalesce into a better result for more > people. > > Best regards, > > -Travis > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
