[Numpy-discussion] Re: Vote: complex64 vs complex128

[Robert Kern]

Joe Harrington wrote:
> When I first heard of Complex128, my first response was, "Cool!  I
> didn't even know there was a Double128!"
> 
> Folks seem to agree that precision-based naming would be most
> intuitive to new users, but that length-based naming would be most
> intuitive to low-level programmers.  This is a high-level package,
> whose purpose is to hide the numerical details and programming
> drudgery from the user as much as possible, while still offering high
> performance and not limiting capability too much.  For this type of
> package, a good metric is "when it doesn't restrict capability, do
> what makes sense for new/naiive users".

I'm pretty sure that when any of us say that such-and-such is going to make the
most sense to new users, we're just guessing. Or projecting our experienced-user
prejudices onto them. If I had to register my guess, I would say that either way
will make just as much sense to new users.

I think it's time that we start taking backwards compatibility with previous
releases of numpy seriously and not break numpy code without clear, significant
gains in usability.

-- 
Robert Kern
robert.kern at gmail.com

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
 that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
 an underlying truth."
  -- Umberto Eco