On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Pierre Haessig <pierre.haes...@crans.org>wrote:
> Hi, > Le 06/03/2012 22:19, Charles R Harris a écrit : > > Use polynomial.Polynomial and you won't have this problem. > I was not familiar with the "poly1d vs. Polynomial" choice. > > Now, I found in the doc some more or less explicit guidelines in: > http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/routines.polynomials.html > "The polynomial package is newer and more complete than poly1d and the > convenience classes are better behaved in the numpy environment." > > However, poly1d, which is nicely documented doesn't mention the > "competitor". > Going further in this transition, do you feel it would make sense adding > a "See Also" section in poly1d function ? > > That's a good idea, I'll take care of it. Note the caveat about the coefficients going in the opposite direction. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
