[cdavid]

Numpy does not depend on LINPACK, only scipy does (numpy only uses blas if you have one installed, it is optional).

The reason why scipy (and Julia BTW) need blas/lapack is because that's the only way to have decent performance and reasonably accurate linear algebra. The alternative is writing your own implementation of something that has been used and debugged for 30 years, which does not seem like a good idea.

[bachback]

This is what I don't understand at all. Imagine somebody in a different area of computing would say: oh, we solved that 30 years ago and now there is no room for improvement at all? why can't this be done at least in C?

[cdavid]

There is room for improvement, and it gets improved all the time (e.g. openblas is a recent contender). LAPACK is essentially an API for linear algebra, which is what allowed people to improve implementations and to benefit from them in older programs.

Think of it as the C library of numerical computing.

[mistercow]

I'm confused how a library written in Fortran 90 can be called "the C library of numerical computing".

[cdavid]

I was comparing LAPACK to the C library: nobody claims it is weird to use the C library, written > 30 years ago, instead of using something 'more modern'. Everybody uses the C library for system/low level programming, the same is true in numerical computing w.r.t. blas/lapack. Numpy/scipy use it, R use it, julia use it, matlab use it, octave use it.