[Matrix-SIG] Reading binary data from file into NumPy arrays: numpyio

[hinsen@cnrs-orleans.fr]

> This is part of the dilemma I face with even the parts I have already
> inherited in the distribution. With the exception of the core pieces the
> rest of the modules such as the lapack, fft, ..., are all just extras. Now

Right, they could be the first candidates for becoming add-ons. On the
other hand, I worry a bit about installation headaches for potential
users. If I distribute a program and tell people to download and
install 15 packages first, they will probably give up immediately.
Even a perfectly simple installation procedure wouldn't help much;
after all, everybody claims to offer simple installation nowadays.

I could think of a couple of advanced distribution mechanisms, but
they are far from trivial to implement. Example: everything would be
cut into small pieces, and the installation program for any end-user
code would download and install exactly the required stuff
automatically.

> Maybe the right idea is like Amazon.com; you list all the books but have
> places for reader and author "reviews". This makes it cavaet emptor but
> wasn't it always so? I'm thinking of web site that is a guide to the

That's an interesting idea, which I think could work well for
scientific code distribution. It would still be good to establish
certain standards for installation and documentation, and clearly mark
packages that follow these standards and are thus presumably easier to
use. Code quality is of course an entirely different issue.

> This is clearly identical to the general problem of what Guido "blesses" or
> not. I think it less likely that you can pick a computer-science area that
> Guido doesn't know anything about than you can pick some area of numerical
> analysis, probability, and statistics that I know nothing about. Clearly
> nobody is capable of knowing all this stuff. The documentation for the NAG
> library runs nine volumes.

One could have a team of "moderators" for the main subareas. But then
the open review approach would probably lead to the same result anyway,
with some people's opinion on certain subjects being respected more
than others.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Konrad Hinsen                            | E-Mail: hinsen@cnrs-orleans.fr
Centre de Biophysique Moleculaire (CNRS) | Tel.: +33-2.38.25.55.69
Rue Charles Sadron                       | Fax:  +33-2.38.63.15.17
45071 Orleans Cedex 2                    | Deutsch/Esperanto/English/
France                                   | Nederlands/Francais
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------