Many good points have been made in this thread. A couple observations/
questions from my side:
1) competition is good. These days I use IDL, NumPy, PDL and others
(in sequence of frequency) at various times. Basically no one tool is
good for every purpose.
2) Do we need to handle backwards compatibility, i.e. do other package
maintainers expect 'require => ['PDL']' to work in certain ways and do
we need to honour this?
Christian
On 3/11/2009, at 10:09 AM, David Mertens wrote:
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Doug Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi all: I vote we keep PDL::Slatec out of the 'core' PDL. I'm
trying to
get rid of dependencies on this module in my code just to make builds
easier on my systems.
There's bound to be lots of discussion about what should and should
not go into the core. I think that absolutely no external
dependencies should go into the core, so Slatec would be out. The
goal of the core would be to have a module that any Perl module
author could use, knowing it would install on anybody's machine
without any hiccups.
David
_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
