Re: [Numpy-discussion] Allow __getitem__ to support custom objects

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 6:09 PM Sebastian Berg wrote: > > On Tue, 2020-10-27 at 17:15 -0600, Aaron Meurer wrote: > > For ndindex (https://quansight.github.io/ndindex/), the biggest issue > > with the API is that to use an ndindex object to actually index an > > array, you have to use a[idx.raw]

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Allow __getitem__ to support custom objects

On Tue, 2020-10-27 at 17:15 -0600, Aaron Meurer wrote: > For ndindex (https://quansight.github.io/ndindex/), the biggest issue > with the API is that to use an ndindex object to actually index an > array, you have to use a[idx.raw] instead of a[idx]. This is because > for NumPy arrays, you cannot

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Multinomial random sampling

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 5:19 PM Currurant wrote: > I wonder if there is an efficient way to draw multinomial random samples. > For > univariate sampling, we can do that for different parameters and desired > shape, but neither of rng nor multinomial function in numpy.random is able > to achieve

[Numpy-discussion] Multinomial random sampling

I wonder if there is an efficient way to draw multinomial random samples. For univariate sampling, we can do that for different parameters and desired shape, but neither of rng nor multinomial function in numpy.random is able to achieve that. To be specific, can we draw multinomial samples for

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ndarray static typing: Order of generic types

On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 2:44 PM bas van beek wrote: > Hey all, > > > > With the recent merging of numpy/numpy#16759 > we’re at the point where ` > ndarray` can be made generic w.r.t. its dtype and shape. > > An open question which yet remains is to

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Should we transfer MacPython/numpy-wheels to the NumPy org?

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 6:00 AM Matti Picus wrote: > > On 10/29/20 5:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Seems that is pretty easy to transfer a github repo to another owner. > > Should we do this for the numpy-wheels repo? That would put all the > > management in one place and

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Should we transfer MacPython/numpy-wheels to the NumPy org?

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 4:00 AM Matti Picus wrote: > > On 10/29/20 5:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Seems that is pretty easy to transfer a github repo to another owner. > > Should we do this for the numpy-wheels repo? That would put all the > > management in one place and

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Should we transfer MacPython/numpy-wheels to the NumPy org?

I agree with Matti that keeping at least the nightly wheel building / uploading for a bunch of projects all in on place makes sense. Tom On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 6:00 AM Matti Picus wrote: > > On 10/29/20 5:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Seems that is pretty easy to transfer

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.20.x branch in two weeks

Hi All, Time to start planning for the 1.20.x branch. These are my thoughts at the moment: - Keep support for Python 3.6. Python 3.7 came out in June 2018, which seems too recent to be our oldest supported version. - Drop Python 3.6 for 1.21.x, that will make the oldest supported

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Should we transfer MacPython/numpy-wheels to the NumPy org?

On 10/29/20 5:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: Hi All, Seems that is pretty easy to transfer a github repo to another owner. Should we do this for the numpy-wheels repo? That would put all the management in one place and now might be a good time to do it before the 1.20.x branch. Chuck

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Should we transfer MacPython/numpy-wheels to the NumPy org?

Seems like a good idea. It would need Matti or someone to set up the various keys I think? ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion