undefined | Better HN

0 pointsraymondh1y ago0 comments

We should probably get rid of that. It is old (predating numpy) and has limited functionality. In almost every case I can think of, you would be better off with numpy.

0 comments

jph001y ago

If you don't want to add a dep on numpy (which is a big complex module) then it's nice to have a stdlib option. So there are certainly at least some cases where you're not better off with numpy.

coldtea1y ago

Even better if Python adds a mainline pandas/numpy like C-based table structure, with a very small subset of the pandas/numpy functionality, that's also convertable to pandas/numpy/etc.

ameliaquining1y ago

What kind of subset would you have in mind? I think that any kind of numeric operation would be off the table, for the reasons given in PEP 465:

"Providing a quality implementation of matrix multiplication is highly non-trivial. Naive nested loop implementations are very slow and shipping such an implementation in CPython would just create a trap for users. But the alternative – providing a modern, competitive matrix multiply – would require that CPython link to a BLAS library, which brings a set of new complications. In particular, several popular BLAS libraries (including the one that ships by default on OS X) currently break the use of multiprocessing."

2 more replies

KptMarchewa1y ago

It just should be native support for Apache Arrow.

dumah1y ago

A performant table data structure with powerful and convenient syntax for interaction is one great feature Q has that Python lacks.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse