Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-11-13 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:24 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> I'll also be giving a lunch talk at BIDS tomorrow to let folks locally >> know about what's going on, which I think will be recorded – I'll send >> around a link after in case ot

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-31 Thread Peter Creasey
> Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 17:52:23 -0400 > From: Marten van Kerkwijk > > Hi Peter, > > When using units, if `a` is not angular (or dimensionless), I don't > see how one could write code in which your example wouldn't fail... > But I may be missing something, since for your example one would just > r

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-27 Thread Marten van Kerkwijk
Hi Peter, When using units, if `a` is not angular (or dimensionless), I don't see how one could write code in which your example wouldn't fail... But I may be missing something, since for your example one would just realize that cos(ka)+i sin(ka) = exp(ika), in which case the log is just ika and o

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-27 Thread Peter Creasey
> Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 17:27:33 -0400 > From: Marten van Kerkwijk > > That sounds somewhat puzzling as units cannot really propagate without > them somehow telling how they would change! (e.g., the outcome of > sin(a) is possible only for angular units and then depends on that > unit). But in any

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-26 Thread Marten van Kerkwijk
Hi Nathaniel, That sounds like it could work very well indeed! Somewhat related only, for the inner loops I've been thinking whether it might be possible to automatically create composite ufuncs, where the inner loops are executed in some prescribed order, so that for instance one could define ``

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-26 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Nathan Goldbaum wrote: > My understanding of this is that the dtype will only hold the unit metadata. > So that means units would propogate through calculations automatically, but > the dtype wouldn't be able to manipulate the array data (in an in-place unit > conv

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-26 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Marten van Kerkwijk wrote: > Hi Nathaniel, > > Thanks for the link. The plans sounds great! You'll not be surprised > to hear I'm particularly interested in the units aspect (and, no, I > don't mind at all if we can stop subclassing ndarray...). Is the idea > that

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-26 Thread Marten van Kerkwijk
That sounds somewhat puzzling as units cannot really propagate without them somehow telling how they would change! (e.g., the outcome of sin(a) is possible only for angular units and then depends on that unit). But in any case, the mailing list is probably not the best case to discuss this - rather

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-26 Thread Nathan Goldbaum
My understanding of this is that the dtype will only hold the unit metadata. So that means units would propogate through calculations automatically, but the dtype wouldn't be able to manipulate the array data (in an in-place unit conversion for example). In this world, astropy quantities and yt's

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-26 Thread Marten van Kerkwijk
Hi Nathaniel, Thanks for the link. The plans sounds great! You'll not be surprised to hear I'm particularly interested in the units aspect (and, no, I don't mind at all if we can stop subclassing ndarray...). Is the idea that there will be a general way for allow a dtype to define how to convert a

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-26 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:24 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > I'll also be giving a lunch talk at BIDS tomorrow to let folks locally > know about what's going on, which I think will be recorded – I'll send > around a link after in case others are interested. Here's that link: https://www.youtube.com

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-20 Thread Stefan van der Walt
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017, at 23:11, Ralf Gommers wrote: > Thanks Nathaniel. I'm looking forward to all of those people getting > involved. Hiring always takes longer than you want, but next year the > pace of development promises to pick up significantly:) I'm excited for the opportunity to dedicate ti

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-19 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Charles R Harris < charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:24 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I wanted to give everyone an update on what's going on with the NumPy >> grant [1]. As you may have noticed, things have been mo

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-19 Thread Charles R Harris
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:24 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Hi all, > > I wanted to give everyone an update on what's going on with the NumPy > grant [1]. As you may have noticed, things have been moving a bit > slower than originally hoped -- unfortunately my health is improving > but has continu

[Numpy-discussion] numpy grant update

2017-10-18 Thread Nathaniel Smith
Hi all, I wanted to give everyone an update on what's going on with the NumPy grant [1]. As you may have noticed, things have been moving a bit slower than originally hoped -- unfortunately my health is improving but has continued to be rocky [2]. Fortunately, I have awesome co-workers, and BIDS