On 29 August 2016 at 19:08, Ken Kundert <python-id...@shalmirane.com> wrote: > Also the interactive environments, such as ipython, need to > adapt. The more this occurs, the better life gets for scientists and > engineers.
This theory of change is backwards - we follow IPython and Project Jupyter when it comes to understanding what's a desirable UX for scientists (primarily) and engineers (somewhat), rather than the other way around. (Ditto for SciPy and Numpy for the computational requirements side of things - in addition to the already referenced https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0465/ for matrix multiplication, there's also https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0357/ which defined the __index__ protocol, and https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3118/ which defined a rich C-level protocol for shaped data export. Even before there was a PEP process, extended slicing and the Ellipsis literal were added for the benefits of folks writing multidimensional array indexing libraries) So if your aim is to make a "scientists & engineers will appreciate it" UX argument, then you're unlikely to gain much traction here if you haven't successfully made that argument in the Project Jupyter and/or SciPy ecosystems first - if there was a popular "%%siunits" cell magic, or a custom Project Jupyter kernel that added support for SI literals, we'd be having a very different discussion (and you wouldn't feel so alone in making the case for the feature). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
