On Fri, Dec 26 2014, Páll Haraldsson pall.haralds...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe I should just put my blinders on, just not look at other languages
more. I'm pretty convinced all the others I know are obsolete (for new
code).. I just might be missing something with the newer languages.
Or maybe
My rule of thumb is that if I need to worry about the IEEE rounding mode
making a difference in my results, then my problem is really
ill-conditioned and rounding the least of my worries. So I usually just
ignore it.
Same applies to rounding for data displays: if I am worried about 3.5
being
Hans,
yes this can be frustrating. But Julia is in flux and I have to say that I
am very happy that changes are reverted if they turn out to be not
practically (e.g. .+ which I also was not happy with).
One important thing to note: If you don't like this back and forth it
should be better to
I used Julia to make my Christmas presents this year. It's not very
impressive code (my code never is), but it works, and the end results were
well received.
https://github.com/cormullion/spiral-moon-calendar.jl
Happy New Year!
Just a remark: round-towards-+Inf is not the same as
round-away-from-zero and
does not fulfill round(-x) = -round(x).
gp round([1.5, 2.5])
%1 = [2, 3]
gp round([-1.5, -2.5])
%2 = [-1, -2]
I am astonished that PARI/GP is rarely mentioned when comparing Julia to
other
I did not mean to imply that no one cares about rounding rules, or that
they are unimportant -- sorry if I was not clear. I only said that in my
(necessarily limited) experience, when IEEE rounding rules start to
matter then I am facing a different, usually more fundamental, problem.
However,
However, these discussions are necessarily very abstract. Having a
concrete issue or use case where you find one rounding mode preferable
to another would help focus the discussion.
@Tamas For an example where it might have the potential to cause problems,
see
Potential future problem:
Hi Hans,
If I understand corretly, #13 is a potential problem arising from a
change in behavior, not an argument in favor of one rounding mode vs
another per se.
The only reasonably cogent argument I know is mentioned in #8750
(unbiasedness). I am glad that the issue is now closed, since that
Tamas,
I agree with you that 'unbiased rounding' is a strong argument in favor of
the
round-to-even rule. It appears natural that e.g. R falls for this rule.
The interpolation case seems to favor a rule that moves all ties in the same
direction, being it upwards or downwards, and independent of
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Tamas Papp wrote:
The only reasonably cogent argument I know is mentioned in #8750
(unbiasedness). I am glad that the issue is now closed, since that means
no more electrons are wasted on it, but I am still curious about
practical examples where rounding mode makes a
Who cares how impressive the code is when the result looks that good? ;)
This is really nice and I might have to print a copy for myself, if that's
alright with you. Happy new year to you too!
On 27 December 2014 at 09:38, cormull...@mac.com wrote:
I used Julia to make my Christmas presents
Thanks for the pointer but what I see is code that talks to Cloud Storage (like
Amazon's S3), I want to interface with the datastore which is a k/v database.
Thanks, and help yourself! (Results not guaranteed for use in lycanthropic
research applications.) And my bad Julia code looks better than my bad
Mathematica code... :)
On Saturday, December 27, 2014 3:38:35 PM UTC, Mike Innes wrote:
Who cares how impressive the code is when the result looks
Hi Robert,
If you are doing this in a publicly-released package, I would suggest to
make very clear to your users that this is happening and either provide a
way to disable redirection, or send the captured output to a log instead.
The functionality is available via `redirect_output`:
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 5:17 AM, Hans W Borchers hwborch...@gmail.com
wrote:
Just a remark: round-towards-+Inf is not the same as
round-away-from-zero and
does not fulfill round(-x) = -round(x).
Right, I realize it wasn't clear from my email, but that was an argument
against the current
Oh, that's very nice! I think I'll have to print some of these out for 2015.
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 10:53 AM, cormull...@mac.com wrote:
Thanks, and help yourself! (Results not guaranteed for use in lycanthropic
research applications.) And my bad Julia code looks better than my bad
very nice
thanks for posting !
On Saturday, December 27, 2014 4:38:11 AM UTC-5, cormu...@mac.com wrote:
I used Julia to make my Christmas presents this year. It's not very
impressive code (my code never is), but it works, and the end results were
well received.
Sorry for the (perhaps) silly question, but a PR that I wrote was merged
recently and it introduces some new functionality that hasn't yet made it
back to previous releases. I'd like to update Compat.jl to account for
this. Is there an easy way to determine the version of Julia that received
Is there any planned support, and/or current work arounds to enable
something like
function f{T1, T2 : AType{T1}}(X::Vector{T2}, Y:T1)
...
end
Zenna
You shouldn't be using include here – the way to do this is to make sure
that moduleFile.jl is in your LOAD_PATH and then do `using moduleFile` or
`import moduleFile`.
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 3:02 AM, Kuba Roth kuba.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi there,
I'd like to load a custom module from a custom
On Saturday, December 27, 2014 2:19:25 PM UTC-5, Seth wrote:
Sorry for the (perhaps) silly question, but a PR that I wrote was merged
recently and it introduces some new functionality that hasn't yet made it
back to previous releases. I'd like to update Compat.jl to account for
this. Is
Check the VERSION variable -- see Compat.jl for examples of this in use
(`VERSION = v0.4.0-dev+1234` etc.)
You can use `git rev-list` to get the number of commits from some reference
point.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11657295/count-the-number-of-commits-on-a-git-branch
(for example,
I got the same LinAlg and NoSuchKey errors when trying to get 0.3.4 running
on Yosemite. Now it downloads okay but gives a File is damaged message
when I try to start the .dmg file. Also, the current 0.4.0 .dmg version
installs but seems to have the same LinAlg problem as the initial version
Thanks, but I'm not quite sure how to use this to get the version I need.
That is, in the example above, in what version of Julia was my PR first
included? (Then, how did you determine that?)
On Saturday, December 27, 2014 5:35:18 PM UTC-5, Isaiah wrote:
Check the VERSION variable -- see
I wonder if there is also system-specific issues going on here. Under
Windows, I need to use the “include()” function to register any updates I
make to the code in modules outside of the notebook even though the source
file is in a folder within the LOAD_PATH. If I just use the “using
I have the IJulia kernel restarting issue that, based on my search, was
supposed to have been resolved. After I start IJulia notebook, kernel keeps
restarting every few seconds. I am running Julia on Linux Mint 17.1. The
issue seems to be linked to ZMQ.
Error from running IJulia notebook:
The devectorized code below should be much faster than equivalent
vectorized code, according to Fast Numeric Computation in Julia
http://julialang.org/blog/2013/09/fast-numeric/ on the official
julialang.org web site. But I find just the opposite!
julia x = randn(1000);
julia y =
I'm working on a book chapter about using the Julia package manager. One
example I want to include is debugging a broken package install. I'm
currently expecting to focus on a problem caused by binary installs, since
that seems to be the mostly likely cause of a Pkg.add failing.
However, it's
It should probably be the 1st faq. It's the first performance tip though:
http://julia.readthedocs.org/en/latest/manual/performance-tips/
Put your code in functions (or liberally use const). Globals are slow.
On Dec 27, 2014 10:24 PM, Bob Quazar reg...@gmail.com wrote:
The devectorized code
would it make sense to warn the user about slowing down global variables
from julia itself? and/or about other slowing constructs that are almost
always beginner's mistakes that julia can guess at? my guess is that if
a program does not reuse a global outside its context, this is defacto a
I added some documentation (really, a simple shell script) on this at the end
of the Compat README.
--Tim
On Saturday, December 27, 2014 03:22:43 PM Seth wrote:
Thanks, but I'm not quite sure how to use this to get the version I need.
That is, in the example above, in what version of Julia
Images has a somewhat overwhelming number of closed issues (and likely, a few
still open) regarding problems with ImageMagick. Take your pick :-).
--Tim
On Sunday, December 28, 2014 03:32:45 AM Leah Hanson wrote:
I'm working on a book chapter about using the Julia package manager. One
example
I'm somewhat thrilled that the problem here is the inability to conjure a
failing case :)
On Dec 27, 2014, at 11:42 PM, Tim Holy tim.h...@gmail.com wrote:
Images has a somewhat overwhelming number of closed issues (and likely, a few
still open) regarding problems with ImageMagick. Take
Funny enough, very similar question today on Stackoverflow:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27673278/why-is-this-devectorized-julia-code-over-20x-too-slow/
@ivo welch, see https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/8870 and the
linked issues from it.
On Sunday, December 28, 2014 5:22:52 PM
Installing g++ solved the problem.
On Saturday, December 27, 2014 7:04:31 PM UTC-6, AVF wrote:
I have the IJulia kernel restarting issue that, based on my search, was
supposed to have been resolved. After I start IJulia notebook, kernel keeps
restarting every few seconds. I am running Julia
On Saturday, December 27, 2014 5:15:38 PM UTC-5, Stefan Karpinski wrote:
You shouldn't be using include here – the way to do this is to make sure
that moduleFile.jl is in your LOAD_PATH and then do `using moduleFile` or
`import moduleFile`.
I've complained before that include in user code
36 matches
Mail list logo
