Re: [Numpy-discussion] Fwd: SciPy2017 Sprints FinAid for sprint leaders/core devs

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Sebastian Berg < > sebast...@sipsolutions.net> wrote: > >> On Thu, 2017-03-30 at 22:46 +1300, Ralf Gommers wrote: >> > >> >> > >> > Agreed, and I would call that productive. Getting even one new >> > ma

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Fwd: [numfocus] Grants up to $3k available to NumFOCUS projects (sponsored & affiliated)

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 8:07 AM, Julian Taylor < jtaylor.deb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 31.03.2017 15:51, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > > On Mar 31, 2017 1:15 AM, "Ralf Gommers" > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Ralf Gommers > > mai

Re: [Numpy-discussion] __array_ufunc__ counting down to launch, T-24 hrs.

Hi Nathan, That is a good point: Yes, one can leave __array_prepare__ and __array_wrap__ in place: only for ufuncs will they be ignored if __array_ufunc__ is present; __array_wrap__ in particular will still be used by quite a lot of other numpy functions (other use of __array_prepare__ is usually

Re: [Numpy-discussion] __array_ufunc__ counting down to launch, T-24 hrs.

Thanks for linking to the updated NEP, I've been looking for a good overview of this discussion. Up until now I haven't wanted to wade through the extensive discussion on this topic. I'm curious, if I want to simultaneously support older Numpy versions as well as newer versions, will I be able to

Re: [Numpy-discussion] __array_ufunc__ counting down to launch, T-24 hrs.

Hi All, Following Nathaniel's request, I have made a PR that changes the original NEP to describe the current implementation. * PR at https://github.com/charris/numpy/pull/9 * Rendered relevant page at http://www.astro.utoronto.ca/~mhvk/numpy-doc/neps/ufunc-overrides.html It may still be somewhat

Re: [Numpy-discussion] __array_ufunc__ counting down to launch, T-24 hrs.

I agree with Nathaniel -- let's finish the design doc first. On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:08 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Just a note that the __array_ufunc__ PR is ready to merge. If you are > > interested, you can re

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Fwd: [numfocus] Grants up to $3k available to NumFOCUS projects (sponsored & affiliated)

On 31.03.2017 15:51, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Mar 31, 2017 1:15 AM, "Ralf Gommers" > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Ralf Gommers > mailto:ralf.gomm...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Julian Taylo

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Fwd: [numfocus] Grants up to $3k available to NumFOCUS projects (sponsored & affiliated)

On Mar 31, 2017 1:15 AM, "Ralf Gommers" wrote: On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Julian Taylor < > jtaylor.deb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> I have two ideas under one big important topic: make numpy python3 >> compatible. >> >> The

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Optimize evaluation of function on matrix

Hey, Am 27.03.2017 um 16:09 schrieb Sebastian Berg: > On Mon, 2017-03-27 at 13:06 +0200, Florian Lindner wrote: >> Hey, >> >> I've timed the two versions, one basisfunction being a function: >> >> 1 loop, best of 3: 17.3 s per loop >> >> the other one, basisfunction being a list of functions: >> >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Fwd: [numfocus] Grants up to $3k available to NumFOCUS projects (sponsored & affiliated)

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:33 PM, Julian Taylor < > jtaylor.deb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> I have two ideas under one big important topic: make numpy python3 >> compatible. >> >> The first fits pretty well with the grant size and nob