5 ms·

Agreed on all points though I think you underestimate to what extent Numpy is "carrying" Python. Without Numpy Python would be dead and buried in my view. Sure

Agreed on all points though I think you underestimate to what extent Numpy is "carrying" Python. Without Numpy Python would be dead and buried in my view. Sure tons of stuff is "pure" Python but the core of its cred comes from the huge quality of some libraries which are built around Numpy (Pandas but one example). Separately though, sometimes when you want to break the dead hand of the committee-driven, value-destroying hold of a small group of individuals, you have to mercifully push aside the figurehead that provides their credibility. That figurehead is Guido van Rossum, and his post speaks more than what I could about how his time is over.

sitkack 12y ago
Python 4
- vegabook 12y ago
  yes please.
dalke 12y ago
I have a hard time believing that NumPy is "carrying" Python to the extent you suggest. While a large number of people use Python because of NumPy, my work in chemical structure analysis and search doesn't depend on NumPy. I use the package about once a year, and few of the chemistry analysis tools I have a dependency on it. I used to be involved with the Biopython project, and while NumPy is strongly recommended for a couple of the modules, it's not a requirement. Then there's all the people who use it because of Django, and Zope before that. (I remember that the 2000 Python conference seemed to be half Zope developers.) Plus the win32 extensions get about 7,000 downloads per week, implying a pretty active base in that area. Checking the PyCon talks, only about 5% of them seem to deal with numeric work. (Then again, there's SciPy ... but there's also DjangoCon and local non-NumPy meetings; certainly few in our local user group meeting work with NumPy.) How then did you draw your conclusion? Python-the-language did make three changes to support the language: multi-dimensional array slicing, the Ellipsis notation, and most recently the infix operator for matrix multiplication. But I believe that any language which couldn't handle a NumPy-like module would not be that successful in the first place.
Igglyboo 12y ago
I think you're overestimating the amount of people using Numpy. There's no way it's more popular than Django, scientific computing is mainly academic anyways.
- shadowmint 12y ago
  ...not by as much as you might imagine. django Downloads (All Versions): 25082 downloads in the last day 171415 downloads in the last week 743271 downloads in the last month numpy Downloads (All Versions): 12920 downloads in the last day 80640 downloads in the last week 327163 downloads in the last month
  - vegabook 12y ago
    I am sorry, and at risk of downvotes, web dev is a much faster (dare I say it more fickle) crowd than science. Python is not a whole lot better than Golang, Ruby and of course, Node.js at this use case. Absolute numbers are not persuasive to me here. There are far fewer scientists than web devs (your stats imply ~ 1:2). Indeed I would venture to suggest that your data means that numpy punches well above its weight relative to other languages' science:webdev ratios. Let's not forget that Numpy and its direct linear ancestor, Numeric, has been dominant for more than a decade. Show me the Python web framework which can say the same. Flask/Bottle/Pyramid/Django/Tornado - pick your fashion. Another point (to the grandparent posts): putting Numpy into a "science" pidgeon hole is erroneous. It is massively used in finance, engineering, bioinformatics, and statistics.
    - hcarvalhoalves 12y ago
      > There are far fewer scientists than web devs ... and there can still be more scientists using Python than web devs using it. Python web development is niche, despite the good frameworks. If you look at job postings, it's eclipsed by RoR, .NET, Java... maybe even PHP. > Let's not forget that Numpy and its direct linear ancestor, Numeric, has been dominant for more than a decade. Show me the Python web framework which can say the same. Django was released almost 10 years ago, and I remember it was already popular, a lot of people migrated from Plone.

sitkack 12y ago

Python 4

vegabook 12y ago
yes please.

dalke 12y ago

I have a hard time believing that NumPy is "carrying" Python to the extent you suggest. While a large number of people use Python because of NumPy, my work in chemical structure analysis and search doesn't depend on NumPy. I use the package about once a year, and few of the chemistry analysis tools I have a dependency on it. I used to be involved with the Biopython project, and while NumPy is strongly recommended for a couple of the modules, it's not a requirement. Then there's all the people who use it because of Django, and Zope before that. (I remember that the 2000 Python conference seemed to be half Zope developers.) Plus the win32 extensions get about 7,000 downloads per week, implying a pretty active base in that area. Checking the PyCon talks, only about 5% of them seem to deal with numeric work. (Then again, there's SciPy ... but there's also DjangoCon and local non-NumPy meetings; certainly few in our local user group meeting work with NumPy.) How then did you draw your conclusion? Python-the-language did make three changes to support the language: multi-dimensional array slicing, the Ellipsis notation, and most recently the infix operator for matrix multiplication. But I believe that any language which couldn't handle a NumPy-like module would not be that successful in the first place.

Igglyboo 12y ago

I think you're overestimating the amount of people using Numpy. There's no way it's more popular than Django, scientific computing is mainly academic anyways.

shadowmint 12y ago
...not by as much as you might imagine. django Downloads (All Versions): 25082 downloads in the last day 171415 downloads in the last week 743271 downloads in the last month numpy Downloads (All Versions): 12920 downloads in the last day 80640 downloads in the last week 327163 downloads in the last month
- vegabook 12y ago
  I am sorry, and at risk of downvotes, web dev is a much faster (dare I say it more fickle) crowd than science. Python is not a whole lot better than Golang, Ruby and of course, Node.js at this use case. Absolute numbers are not persuasive to me here. There are far fewer scientists than web devs (your stats imply ~ 1:2). Indeed I would venture to suggest that your data means that numpy punches well above its weight relative to other languages' science:webdev ratios. Let's not forget that Numpy and its direct linear ancestor, Numeric, has been dominant for more than a decade. Show me the Python web framework which can say the same. Flask/Bottle/Pyramid/Django/Tornado - pick your fashion. Another point (to the grandparent posts): putting Numpy into a "science" pidgeon hole is erroneous. It is massively used in finance, engineering, bioinformatics, and statistics.
  - hcarvalhoalves 12y ago
    > There are far fewer scientists than web devs ... and there can still be more scientists using Python than web devs using it. Python web development is niche, despite the good frameworks. If you look at job postings, it's eclipsed by RoR, .NET, Java... maybe even PHP. > Let's not forget that Numpy and its direct linear ancestor, Numeric, has been dominant for more than a decade. Show me the Python web framework which can say the same. Django was released almost 10 years ago, and I remember it was already popular, a lot of people migrated from Plone.