On Jul 16, 2012, at 1:52 AM, Pierre GM wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm siding w/ Tom, Nathaniel and Travis. I don't think the change as it is is
> advisable. It's a regression, and breaking=bad.
> Now, I can understand your frustration, so, what about a trade-off? The first
> line w/ a comment after the
Hello,
I'm siding w/ Tom, Nathaniel and Travis. I don't think the change as it is
is advisable. It's a regression, and breaking=bad.
Now, I can understand your frustration, so, what about a trade-off? The
first line w/ a comment after the first 'skip_header' ones should be parsed
for column titles
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> On Jul 15, 2012, at 7:08 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> We are nearing a code-freeze for NumPy 1.7. Are there any last-minute
>> changes people are wanting
This looked like an interesting one for sure. I can't look at the PR right
now for some reason (Github gave me a 500 error). I know there were some
comments, though.
-Travis
On Jul 15, 2012, at 9:52 PM, Frédéric Bastien wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there is a PR that I think could be merged before
Hi,
there is a PR that I think could be merged before the relase:
https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/326
It is the addition of the inplace_increment function. It seam good,
but I can't review it enough as it use many numpy internal that I
never used or looked at. But the tests seam to cover all
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> That reminds me.
>
> How many NumPy devs are going to be at SciPy this year?It would be
> good to have a NumPy sprint there. Ideas for what we could work on:
>
> 1) Make progress on the 1.7.0 release
> 2) Make progress on the conversi
>
> Bump for: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/351
>
>
> As requested by njsmith, I gave a more detailed explanation and asked
> the list for input at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/numpy-discussion@scipy.org/msg38306.html
>
> There was one qualified negative reply and nothing (yet) further.
That reminds me.
How many NumPy devs are going to be at SciPy this year?It would be good to
have a NumPy sprint there. Ideas for what we could work on:
1) Make progress on the 1.7.0 release
2) Make progress on the conversion to Github
3) Make progress against tickets and PRs
If enough Nu
On Jul 15, 2012, at 7:08 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> We are nearing a code-freeze for NumPy 1.7. Are there any last-minute
> changes people are wanting to push into NumPy 1.7? We should discuss them as
> soon as
On Sat, 2012-07-14 at 17:45 -0500, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> We are nearing a code-freeze for NumPy 1.7. Are there any
> last-minute changes people are wanting to push into NumPy 1.7? We
> should discuss them as soon as possible.
>
> I'm proposing a code-freeze at midnight UTC on
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Mike Ressler wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > I was thinking of adding quickselect, but if you have made a start ... go
> > for it.
>
> This is territory where I personally am fearful to tread - I'm no
> developer, but I am a
On Jul 15, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Chris Ball wrote:
> Stefan Krah bytereef.org> writes:
> ...
>> I wonder if this might be a blocker: Python-3.3 will be released in August
>> and I don't think the issue is fixed yet:
>>
>> http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/ticket/2145
>
> In case it helps, on a 64-b
Hello,
I assume you checked that ?
http://www.scipy.org/Installing_SciPy/Mac_OS_X
You basically have everything you need there. A basic warning, though: you
don't want to overwrite Mac OS X's own numpy, but to install it either locally
(in ~/.local, using python setup.install --user) or in a vir
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> I was thinking of adding quickselect, but if you have made a start ... go
> for it.
This is territory where I personally am fearful to tread - I'm no
developer, but I am an awfully good alpha/beta tester! I can go back
to the archives and
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Mike Ressler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A couple of years ago there was a flurry of work partially at my
> instigation at SciPy 2009 to build a better median function based on a
> select algorithm rather than a sort algorithm. It seemed that it had
> progressed quite far, bu
Hi,
A couple of years ago there was a flurry of work partially at my
instigation at SciPy 2009 to build a better median function based on a
select algorithm rather than a sort algorithm. It seemed that it had
progressed quite far, but the code in lib/function_base.py still uses
a sort. Has the sel
Stefan Krah bytereef.org> writes:
...
> I wonder if this might be a blocker: Python-3.3 will be released in August
> and I don't think the issue is fixed yet:
>
> http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/ticket/2145
In case it helps, on a 64-bit Debian 6 machine where building with Python 3.1
and 3.2
Hi,
I'm trying to set up various build machines. Some of these are with
ShiningPanda.com, which provides a 64-bit Debian 6 machine (as well as Windows
7). This machine has multiple versions of Python installed.
Using the build procedure below, I see a test failure with Python 2.6 (and 2.7)
bu
On Jul 15, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 6:18 PM, jay bourque wrote:
>> Just added PR #359. The purpose is to allow the nditer object operand and
>> iter flags to be set for a ufunc to provide better control over how an array
>> is iterated over by a ufunc an
Hi,
I'm having some trouble building numpy on a 64-bit Windows 7 machine. I'm
probably accidentally missing a step following the build process described at
http://scipy.org/Installing_SciPy/Windows; it would be great if someone could
spot what!
Here's what I did:
1. installed python 2.7 from p
Travis can better speak to specific use cases, but one example where this
might be useful is an "in place" ufunc, or a ufunc operand that's
broadcasted and can hold a reduce value.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 6:18 PM, jay bourque
> wrote:
>
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 6:18 PM, jay bourque wrote:
> Just added PR #359. The purpose is to allow the nditer object operand and
> iter flags to be set for a ufunc to provide better control over how an array
> is iterated over by a ufunc and how the ufunc uses the operands passed to
> it. One speci
Just added PR #359. The purpose is to allow the nditer object operand and
iter flags to be set for a ufunc to provide better control over how an
array is iterated over by a ufunc and how the ufunc uses the operands
passed to it. One specific motivation for this is to be able to specify an
input ope
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 10:56 AM, David Cournapeau wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Ralf Gommers <
> ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote
Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> > What about the tickets still open for 1.7.0
> > (http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/report/3)? There are a few important ones
> > left.
> >
> > These I would consider blockers:
> > - #2108 Datetime failures with MinGW
I wonder if this might be a blocker: Python-3.3 will
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Ralf Gommers
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 1
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Ralf Gommers
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Travis Oliphant
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hey all,
>> >>
>> >> We
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Travis Oliphant
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hey all,
> >>
> >> We are nearing a code-freeze for NumPy 1.7. Are there any last-minute
> >
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Travis Oliphant
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> We are nearing a code-freeze for NumPy 1.7. Are there any last-minute
>> changes people are wanting to push into NumPy 1.7? We should discuss them
>> as
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Thouis (Ray) Jones wrote:
>
> On Jul 15, 2012 2:08 PM, "Ralf Gommers"
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Travis Oliphant
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hey all,
> >>
> >> We are nearing a code-freeze for NumPy 1.7. Are there any last-minute
> c
On Jul 15, 2012 2:08 PM, "Ralf Gommers" wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Travis Oliphant
wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> We are nearing a code-freeze for NumPy 1.7. Are there any last-minute
changes people are wanting to push into NumPy 1.7? We should discuss them
as soon as pos
On 07/15/2012 12:31 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> In https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/350/files ,
>
> javius provides a patch to allow field extraction from a structured
> array to return a view instead of a copy. Generally, this is consistent
> with the desire to have NumPy return views whenev
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> We are nearing a code-freeze for NumPy 1.7. Are there any last-minute
> changes people are wanting to push into NumPy 1.7? We should discuss them
> as soon as possible.
>
> I'm proposing a code-freeze at midnight UTC on J
33 matches
Mail list logo
