Hi,
16.02.2012 06:09, josef.p...@gmail.com kirjoitti:
[clip]
numpy linalg.svd doesn't produce always the same results
running this gives two different answers,
using scipy.linalg.svd I always get the same answer, which is one of
the numpy answers
(numpy random.multivariate_normal is
An example I really like is LibreOffice's get involved page.
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-involved/
Producing something similar for NumPy will take some work, but I believe it's
needed.
Speaking as someone who has contributed to numpy in a microscopic fashion, I
agree completely. I
On 2/15/12 6:27 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
But in the very end, when agreement can't
be reached by other means, the developers are the one making the calls.
(This is simply a consequence that they are the only ones who can
credibly threaten to fork the project.)
Interesting point. I
On Feb 15, 2012, at 6:18 PM, Joe Harrington wrote:
Of course, balancing all of this (and our security blanket) is the
possibility of someone splitting the code if they don't like how
Continuum runs things. Perry, you've done that yourself to this
code's
predecessor, so you know the
On Feb 16, 2012, at 12:15 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
On 2/15/12 6:27 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
But in the very end, when agreement can't
be reached by other means, the developers are the one making the calls.
(This is simply a consequence that they are the only ones who can
credibly
On 2/16/12 6:23 AM, Francesc Alted wrote:
On Feb 16, 2012, at 12:15 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
On 2/15/12 6:27 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
But in the very end, when agreement can't be reached by other
means, the developers are the one making the calls. (This is
simply a consequence that they
If I can chime in as a newcomer on this list:
I don't think a conflict of interest is at all likely, but I can see
the point of those saying that it's worth thinking about this while
everything is going well. If any tension does arise, it will be all
but impossible to decide on a fair governance
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:44 AM, Pauli Virtanen p...@iki.fi wrote:
Hi,
16.02.2012 06:09, josef.p...@gmail.com kirjoitti:
[clip]
numpy linalg.svd doesn't produce always the same results
running this gives two different answers,
using scipy.linalg.svd I always get the same answer, which is
16.02.2012 14:14, josef.p...@gmail.com kirjoitti:
[clip]
We had other cases of several patterns in quasi-deterministic linalg
before, but as far as I remember only in the final digits of
precision, where it didn't matter much except for reducing test
precision in my cases.
In the random
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Pauli Virtanen p...@iki.fi wrote:
16.02.2012 14:14, josef.p...@gmail.com kirjoitti:
[clip]
We had other cases of several patterns in quasi-deterministic linalg
before, but as far as I remember only in the final digits of
precision, where it didn't matter much
On 16 February 2012 15:08, Thomas Kluyver tak...@gmail.com wrote:
It strikes me that the effort everyone's put into this thread could
have by now designed some way to resolve disputes. ;-)
This is not intended to downplay the concerns raised in this thread,
but I can't help myself.
I propose
16.02.2012 14:54, josef.p...@gmail.com kirjoitti:
[clip]
If I interpret you correctly, this should be a svd ticket, or an svd
ticket as duplicate ?
I think it should be a multivariate normal ticket.
Fixing SVD is in my opinion not sensible: its only guarantee is that A
= U S V^H down to
On 2/16/12 8:06 AM, Scott Sinclair wrote:
On 16 February 2012 15:08, Thomas Kluyvertak...@gmail.com wrote:
It strikes me that the effort everyone's put into this thread could
have by now designed some way to resolve disputes. ;-)
This is not intended to downplay the concerns raised in this
On Feb 16, 2012, at 12:08 AM, Matthew Brett wrote:
The question is more about what can possibly be done about it. To really
shift power, my hunch is that the only practical way would be to, like
Mark said, make sure there are very active non-Continuum-employed
developers. But perhaps I'm
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Pauli Virtanen p...@iki.fi wrote:
16.02.2012 14:54, josef.p...@gmail.com kirjoitti:
[clip]
If I interpret you correctly, this should be a svd ticket, or an svd
ticket as duplicate ?
I think it should be a multivariate normal ticket.
Fixing SVD is in my
On 02/16/2012 08:06 AM, Scott Sinclair wrote:
On 16 February 2012 15:08, Thomas Kluyvertak...@gmail.com wrote:
It strikes me that the effort everyone's put into this thread could
have by now designed some way to resolve disputes. ;-)
This is not intended to downplay the concerns raised in
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Pierre Haessig
pierre.haes...@crans.orgwrote:
Le 16/02/2012 16:20, josef.p...@gmail.com a écrit :
I don't see any way to fix multivariate_normal for this case, except
for dropping svd or for random perturbing a covariance matrix with
multiplicity of
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 16:12, Pierre Haessig pierre.haes...@crans.org wrote:
Le 16/02/2012 16:20, josef.p...@gmail.com a écrit :
I don't see any way to fix multivariate_normal for this case, except
for dropping svd or for random perturbing a covariance matrix with
multiplicity of singular
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@enthought.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Pierre Haessig pierre.haes...@crans.org
wrote:
Le 16/02/2012 16:20, josef.p...@gmail.com a écrit :
I don't see any way to fix multivariate_normal for this case, except
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:30 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@enthought.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Pierre Haessig pierre.haes...@crans.org
wrote:
Le 16/02/2012 16:20, josef.p...@gmail.com a écrit :
I
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote:
If non-contributing users came along on the Cython list demanding that
we set up a system to select non-developers along on a board that would
have discussions in order to veto pull requests, I don't know
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Pauli Virtanen p...@iki.fi wrote:
16.02.2012 14:54, josef.p...@gmail.com kirjoitti:
[clip]
If I interpret you correctly, this should be a svd ticket, or an svd
ticket as duplicate ?
I think it should be a multivariate normal ticket.
Fixing SVD is in my
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:47 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:30 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@enthought.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Pierre Haessig pierre.haes...@crans.org
I have a user who is reporting tests that are failing on his platform. I have
not been able to reproduce the error on my system, but working with him, we
have isolated the problem to unexpected results when PyArray_FromObject() is
called. Here is the chain of events:
In python, an integer is
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 17:07, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
cholesky is also deterministic in my runs
We will need to check a variety of builds with different LAPACK
libraries and also different matrix sizes to be sure. Alas!
--
Robert Kern
I have come to believe that the whole world is an
On Feb 16, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
Travis's proposal is that we go from a large number of self-selecting
people putting in little bits of time to a small number of designated
people putting in lots of time.
That's not what Travis, or anyone else, proposed.
Travis
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:07 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:47 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:30 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@enthought.com wrote:
On Thu,
Hi,
16.02.2012 18:00, Nathaniel Smith kirjoitti:
[clip]
I agree, but the behavior is still surprising -- people reasonably
expect something like svd to be deterministic. So there's probably a
doc bug for alerting people that their reasonable expectation is, in
fact, wrong :-).
The problem
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Inati, Souheil (NIH/NIMH) [E] As
great and trustworthy as Travis is, there is a very real
potential for conflict of interest here. He is going to be leading an
organization to raise and distribute funding and at the same time leading a
commercial for profit
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Pauli Virtanen p...@iki.fi wrote:
Hi,
16.02.2012 18:00, Nathaniel Smith kirjoitti:
[clip]
I agree, but the behavior is still surprising -- people reasonably
expect something like svd to be deterministic. So there's probably a
doc bug for alerting people
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Matthew Brett
Personally, I
would say that making the founder of a company, which is working to
make money from Numpy, the only decision maker on numpy -
is - scary.
not to me:
-- power always goes to those that actually write the code
-- as far as I can
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote:
If non-contributing users came along on the Cython list demanding that
we set up a system to select non-developers along on a board
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 05:00:29PM +, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
I agree, but the behavior is still surprising -- people reasonably
expect something like svd to be deterministic.
People are wrong then. Trust me, I work enough with ill-conditionned
problems, including SVDs, to know that the
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no wrote:
If non-contributing users came along on the
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Thouis (Ray) Jones tho...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 21:54, Fernando Perez fperez@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Pauli Virtanen p...@iki.fi wrote:
The lack of attachments is the main problem with this transition. It's
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:09 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Francesc Alted franc...@continuum.io wrote:
On Feb 16, 2012, at 12:15 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
On 2/15/12 6:27 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
But in the very end, when agreement can't
be reached by other means, the developers are the one making the calls.
Hi,
Last week we merged https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/201, which causes
DeprecationWarning's and RuntimeWarning's to be converted to errors if they
occur when running the test suite. The purpose of that is to make sure that
code that still uses other deprecated code (or code that for some
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Francesc Alted franc...@continuum.io
wrote:
On Feb 16, 2012, at 12:15 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
On 2/15/12 6:27 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
But in the very end, when
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.com wrote:
But surely - surely - the best thing to do here is to formulate
something that might be acceptable, and for everyone to say what they
think the problems would be. Do you agree?
Absolutely -- but just like anything
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote:
Why not the NA discussion? Would we really want to have that happen again?
Note that it still isn't fully resolved and progress still needs to be made
(I think the last thread did an excellent job of fleshing out the ideas,
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Francesc Alted franc...@continuum.io wrote:
On Feb 16, 2012, at 12:15 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
On 2/15/12 6:27 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
But in the very end, when
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Travis Vaught tra...@vaught.net wrote:
On Feb 16, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
Travis's proposal is that we go from a large number of self-selecting
people putting in little bits of time to a small number of designated
people putting in lots of
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Travis Vaught tra...@vaught.net wrote:
On Feb 16, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
Travis's proposal is that we go from a large number of self-selecting
people putting in
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Travis Vaught tra...@vaught.net wrote:
On Feb 16, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
Travis's proposal is that we go from a large number of self-selecting
people putting in
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Pauli Virtanen p...@iki.fi wrote:
Hi,
16.02.2012 18:00, Nathaniel Smith kirjoitti:
[clip]
I agree, but the behavior is still surprising -- people reasonably
expect something like svd to be deterministic. So there's probably a
doc bug for alerting people that
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Travis Vaught tra...@vaught.net wrote:
On Feb 16, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
Travis's
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Travis Vaught tra...@vaught.net
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Travis Vaught
This has been a clarifying discussion for some people. I'm glad people are
speaking up. I believe in the value of consensus and the value of users
opinions.I want to make sure that people who use NumPy and haven't yet
learned how to contribute, feel like they have a voice. I have
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 19:25, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote:
In another thread Jira was proposed as an alternative to Trac. Can you point
out some of its strengths and weaknesses, and tell us why you decided to
move away from it?
The two primary reasons were that our Jira
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Thouis (Ray) Jones tho...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 19:25, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com
wrote:
In another thread Jira was proposed as an alternative to Trac. Can you
point
out some of its strengths and weaknesses, and tell us why
Hi,
Just for my own sake, can I clarify what you are saying here?
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.io wrote:
I'm not a big fan of design-by-committee as I haven't seen it be very
successful in creating new technologies. It is pretty good at enforcing the
Mark Wiebe and I have been discussing off and on (as well as talking with
Charles) a good way forward to balance two competing desires:
* addition of new features that are needed in NumPy
* improving the code-base generally and moving towards a more
maintainable NumPy
I know
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:20 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@enthought.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.io
wrote:
Mark Wiebe and I have been discussing off and on (as well
Ralf Gommers ralf.gommers at googlemail.com writes:
...
While we're at it, our buildbot situation is much worse than our issue
tracker situation. This also looks good (and free):
http://www.jetbrains.com/teamcity/
I'd like to help with the NumPy Buildbot situation, and below I propose
a plan
Matthew,
What you should take from my post is that I appreciate your concern for the
future of the NumPy project, and am grateful that you have an eye to the sort
of things that can go wrong --- it will help ensure they don't go wrong.
But, I personally don't agree that it is necessary to
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Chris Ball ceb...@gmail.com wrote:
Buildbot is used by some big projects (e.g. Python, Chromium, and
Mozilla), but I'm aware that several projects in the scientific/numeric
Python ecosystem use Jenkins (including Cython, IPython, and SymPy),
often using a
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.io wrote:
Matthew,
What you should take from my post is that I appreciate your concern for the
future of the NumPy project, and am grateful that you have an eye to the sort
of things that can go wrong --- it will help
On 2012-02-16, at 1:28 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
I think this is a good point, which is why the idea of a long term release is
appealing. That release should be stodgy and safe, while the ongoing
development can be much more radical in making changes.
I sort of thought this *was* the
On Thursday, February 16, 2012, Warren Weckesser wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.iowrote:
Mark Wiebe and I have been discussing off and on (as well as talking with
Charles) a good way forward to balance two competing desires:
* addition of
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Alan G Isaac alan.is...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/16/2012 7:22 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
This has not been an encouraging episode in striving for consensus.
Striving for consensus does not mean that a minority
automatically gets veto rights.
'Striving' for
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Alan G Isaac alan.is...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/16/2012 7:22 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
This has not been an encouraging episode in striving for consensus.
I disagree.
Failure to reach consensus does not imply lack of striving.
Hey Alan, thanks for your
Hi Bill,
Looks like you are running a very fresh version of numpy.
Without knowing the build version and what's going on in the extension
module I can't tell you much.
The usual suspects would be:
1) Numpy bug, not too likely.
2) Incorrect use of PyArray_FromObject, you'll need to send more info.
Hi John,
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 8:20 PM, John Hunter jdh2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Alan G Isaac alan.is...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/16/2012 7:22 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
This has not been an encouraging episode in striving for consensus.
I disagree.
Failure to
Val,
The problem occurs in function
PyArrayObject* obj_to_array_allow_conversion(PyObject* input,
int typecode,
int* is_new_object)
in numpy.i (which is the numpy SWIG interface file that I authored
On Thursday, February 16, 2012, John Hunter wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Alan G Isaac
alan.is...@gmail.comjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'alan.is...@gmail.com');
wrote:
On 2/16/2012 7:22 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
This has not been an encouraging episode in striving for consensus.
The OS X slaves (especially PPC) are very valuable for testing.We have an
intern who could help keep the build-bots going if you would give her access to
those machines.
Thanks for being willing to offer them.
-Travis
On Feb 16, 2012, at 6:36 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
Hi,
On Thu,
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Travis Oliphant tra...@continuum.io wrote:
The OS X slaves (especially PPC) are very valuable for testing. We have an
intern who could help keep the build-bots going if you would give her access
to those machines.
Thanks for being willing to offer
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:54 AM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote:
On Thursday, February 16, 2012, John Hunter wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Alan G Isaac alan.is...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 2/16/2012 7:22 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
This has not been an encouraging episode in
On 16 February 2012 17:31, Bruce Southey bsout...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/16/2012 08:06 AM, Scott Sinclair wrote:
This is not intended to downplay the concerns raised in this thread,
but I can't help myself.
I propose the following (tongue-in-cheek) patch against the current
numpy master
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Spotz, William F wfsp...@sandia.govwrote:
I have a user who is reporting tests that are failing on his platform.
I have not been able to reproduce the error on my system, but working with
him, we have isolated the problem to unexpected results when
72 matches
Mail list logo
