Thanks for your explanation. It explains also the following:
>>> R = N.arange(9).reshape(3,3)
>>> ax = [0,2]
>>> U = R[ax,:]
>>> U
array([[0, 1, 2],
[6, 7, 8]])
>>> U[:] = 100
>>> U
array([[100, 100, 100],
[100, 100, 100]])
>>> R# No change since U is a copy
array([[0, 1, 2],
Hi numeric processing fans. I'm pleased to report that you can now have
convenient checkpoint/restart, at least if you are running fedora linux.
Berkeley Lab Checkpoint/Restart for Linux (BLCR)
http://ftg.lbl.gov/CheckpointRestart/CheckpointDownloads.shtml
What I've done is:
1) built 2 rpm pack
A Wednesday 30 January 2008, Timothy Hochberg escrigué:
> [...a fine explanation by Anne and Timothy...]
Ok. As it seems that this subject has interest enough, I went ahead and
created a small document about views vs copies at:
http://www.scipy.org/Cookbook/ViewsVsCopies
I think it resumes what
Hi,
The following gives the wrong answer:
In [2]: A = array(['a','aa','b'])
In [3]: B = array(['d','e'])
In [4]: A.searchsorted(B)
Out[4]: array([3, 0])
The answer should be [3,3]. I've come across this while trying to come
up with an ismember function which works for strings (setmember1d
does
Hi,
OK, i'm using:
In [6]: numpy.__version__
Out[6]: '1.0.3'
Should I try the development version? Which version of numpy would
people generally recommend?
James
___
Numpy-discussion mailing list
Numpy-discussion@scipy.org
http://projects.scipy.org/mai
works fine for me.
In [33]: A = numpy.array(['a','aa','b'])
In [34]: B = numpy.array(['d','e'])
In [35]: A.searchsorted(B)
Out[35]: array([3, 3])
In [36]: numpy.__version__
Out[36]: '1.0.5.dev4567'
L.
On 1/31/08, James Philbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The following gives th
Hmmm. Just downloaded and installed 1.0.4 and i'm still getting this
error. Are you guys using the bleeding edge version or the official
1.0.4 tarball from the webpage?
James
___
Numpy-discussion mailing list
Numpy-discussion@scipy.org
http://projects.sc
Hi,
The following gives the wrong answer:
In [2]: A = array(['a','aa','b'])
In [3]: B = array(['d','e'])
In [4]: A.searchsorted(B)
Out[4]: array([3, 0])
The answer should be [3,3]. I've come across this while trying to come
up with an ismember function which works for strings (setmember1d
does
It works fine also for me (numpy 1.04 gentoo linux on amd64)
Nadav
On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 15:51 +0100, lorenzo bolla wrote:
> works fine for me.
>
>
> In [33]: A = numpy.array(['a','aa','b'])
>
> In [34]: B = numpy.array(['d','e'])
>
> In [35]: A.searchsorted(B)
> Out[35]: array([3, 3])
>
>
I use a dev version (1.0.5.dev4567).
L.
On 1/31/08, James Philbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hmmm. Just downloaded and installed 1.0.4 and i'm still getting this
> error. Are you guys using the bleeding edge version or the official
> 1.0.4 tarball from the webpage?
>
> James
> ___
Hi,
Just tried with numpy from svn and still get this problem:
>>> import numpy
>>> numpy.__version__
'1.0.5.dev4763'
>>> A = numpy.array(['a','aa','b'])
>>> B = numpy.array(['d','e'])
>>> A.searchsorted(B)
array([3, 0])
I guess this must be a platform-dependent bug. I'm running python version:
P
No problem for me (also a svn version) :
Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, Oct 30 2007, 13:54:11)
[GCC 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat 4.1.2-33)] on linux2
>>> import numpy
>>> A = numpy.array(['a','aa','b'])
>>> B = numpy.array(['d','e'])
>>> A.searchsorted(B)
array([3, 3])
Matthieu
2008/1/31, lorenzo bolla <
I do get the problem with a recent(ish) svn, on OS X 10.5.1, python
2.5.1 (from python.org):
In [76]: A = array(['a','aa','b'])
In [77]: B = array(['d','e'])
In [78]: A.searchsorted(B)
Out[78]: array([3, 0])
In [79]: numpy.__version__
Out[79]: '1.0.5.dev4722'
__
I don't know, maybe it's already fixed in more recent versions?
>>> from numpy import *
>>> a=mat('1 2')
>>> b = asfarray(a).flatten()
>>> print b[0]
[[ 1. 2.]]
# ^^ I expected getting 1.0 here
>>> numpy.version.version
'1.0.3'
___
Numpy-discuss
Hi,
With my system running x86_64 SUSE10.0 AMD opteron:
Under Python 2.5.1 (Python 2.5.1 -r251:54863) and numpy 1.0.4
(download of released version) I have the same bug.
Under Python 2.4.1 (May 25 2007, 18:41:31) and numpy 1.0.3 I have no problem.
Perhaps a 32/64 bit problem?
Bruce
On Jan 31, 2
Am Donnerstag, 31. Januar 2008 15:35:25 schrieb James Philbin:
> The following gives the wrong answer:
>
> In [2]: A = array(['a','aa','b'])
>
> In [3]: B = array(['d','e'])
>
> In [4]: A.searchsorted(B)
> Out[4]: array([3, 0])
>
> The answer should be [3,3].
Heh, I got both answers in the same ses
Problem also with Windows P3 binaries.
fwiw,
Alan Isaac
Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, Apr 18 2007, 08:51:08) [MSC v.1310
32 bit (Intel)] on win32
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> import numpy
>>> numpy.__version__
'1.0.4'
>>> A = numpy.array(['a','aa','b'])
>
from docstring in multiarraymodule.c
/** @brief Use bisection of sorted array to find first entries >= keys.
*
* For each key use bisection to find the first index i s.t. key <= arr[i].
* When there is no such index i, set i = len(arr). Return the results in
ret.
* All arrays are assumed conti
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, dmitrey apparently wrote:
> already fixed in more recent versions?
Yes, at least it's fixed in my 1.0.4.
By the way, do you know about the ``A`` attribute of matrices?
Cheers,
Alan Isaac
___
Numpy-discussion mailing list
Numpy-
Alan G Isaac wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, dmitrey apparently wrote:
>
>> already fixed in more recent versions?
>>
>
> Yes, at least it's fixed in my 1.0.4.
>
> By the way, do you know about the ``A`` attribute of matrices?
>
Yes, I know, but numpy.ndarray has no the attribute (I had s
oops. it fails also on an SGI Altix with Suse Linux on it:
Linux pico 2.6.16.27-0.9-default #1 SMP Tue Feb 13 09:35:18 UTC 2007 ia64
ia64 ia64 GNU/Linux
In [33]: A = numpy.array(['a','aa','b'])
In [34]: B = numpy.array(['d','e'])
In [35]: A.searchsorted
Where can I find a list of accepted tokens for the Numpy Core formats as
used in numpy.core.rec.fromfile for instance. I'm working with a binary
file format that includes single byte buffers and other formats that I
need to correctly parse.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
M
lorenzo bolla wrote:
> * All arrays are assumed contiguous on entry and both arr and key must
> be of<-
> * the same comparable type. <-
>
> A and B are not of the same type ('|S2' is not '|S1').
> This should be mentioned somewhere more accessible.
It should also raise an excepti
Hi,
> In particular:
>
> * All arrays are assumed contiguous on entry and both arr and key must be
> of<-
> * the same comparable type. <-
In which case, this seems to be an overly strict implementation of
searchsorted. Surely all that should be required is that the
comparison functi
On Jan 31, 2008 9:17 AM, lorenzo bolla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> from docstring in multiarraymodule.c
>
> /** @brief Use bisection of sorted array to find first entries >= keys.
> *
> * For each key use bisection to find the first index i s.t. key <=
> arr[i].
> * When there is no such index
Well, i've digged around in the source code and here is a patch which
makes it work for the case I wanted:
--- multiarraymodule.c.old 2008-01-31 17:42:32.0 +
+++ multiarraymodule.c 2008-01-31 17:43:43.0 +
@@ -2967,7 +2967,10 @@
char *parr = arr->data;
char *
On Jan 31, 2008 10:33 AM, James Philbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > In particular:
> >
> > * All arrays are assumed contiguous on entry and both arr and key must
> be
> > of<-
> > * the same comparable type. <-
> In which case, this seems to be an overly strict implementat
> True. The problem is knowing when that is the case. The subroutine in
> question is at the bottom of the heap and don't know nothin'. IIRC, it just
> sits there and does the comparison by calling through a pointer with char*
> arguments.
What does the comparison function actually look like for t
On Jan 31, 2008 10:49 AM, James Philbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, i've digged around in the source code and here is a patch which
> makes it work for the case I wanted:
>
> --- multiarraymodule.c.old 2008-01-31 17:42:32.0 +
> +++ multiarraymodule.c 2008-01-31 17:43:43.00
On Jan 31, 2008 10:55 AM, James Philbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > True. The problem is knowing when that is the case. The subroutine in
> > question is at the bottom of the heap and don't know nothin'. IIRC, it
> just
> > sits there and does the comparison by calling through a pointer with
>
James Philbin wrote:
> I can't fathom where the comparison functions exist in the code. It
> seems that the comparison signature is of the form (void*, void*,
> PyArrayObject*), so it doesn't seem possible at the moment to specify
> a compare function which can reason about the underlying types of
I can't fathom where the comparison functions exist in the code. It
seems that the comparison signature is of the form (void*, void*,
PyArrayObject*), so it doesn't seem possible at the moment to specify
a compare function which can reason about the underlying types of the
two void*'s. However, I t
James Philbin wrote:
> I can't fathom where the comparison functions exist in the code. It
> seems that the comparison signature is of the form (void*, void*,
> PyArrayObject*), so it doesn't seem possible at the moment to specify
> a compare function which can reason about the underlying types of
33 matches
Mail list logo
