On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Sebastian se...@sebix.at wrote:
On 2014-10-12 16:54, Warren Weckesser wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com
mailto:robert.k...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Sebastian se...@sebix.at wrote:
On 2014-10-12 16:54, Warren Weckesser wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
Regarding names: shuffle/permutation is a terrible naming convention
IMHO and shouldn't be propagated further. We already have a good
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On 14 Oct 2014 18:29, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Nathaniel Smith
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
Regarding names: shuffle/permutation is a terrible naming
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On 14 Oct 2014 18:29, Charles R Harris
It isn't really a question of accuracy. It breaks unit tests and
reproducibility elsewhere. My vote is to revert to the old behavior in
1.9.1.
Ben Root
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:10 PM, Ariel Rokem aro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:23 AM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote:
It isn't really a question of accuracy. It breaks unit tests and
reproducibility elsewhere. My vote is to revert to the old behavior in
1.9.1.
Why would one want the 2nd order differences at all, if they're not
more
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Warren Weckesser
That isn't what I meant. Higher order doesn't necessarily mean more
accurate. The results simply have different properties. The user needs to
choose the differentiation order that they need. One interesting effect in
data assimilation/modeling is that even-order differentiation can often
have
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote:
That isn't what I meant. Higher order doesn't necessarily mean more
accurate. The results simply have different properties. The user needs to
choose the differentiation order that they need. One interesting effect in
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 8:25 PM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote:
That isn't what I meant. Higher order doesn't necessarily mean more
accurate. The results simply have different properties. The user needs
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:35 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Warren Weckesser
warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
There is an oldish feature request in github
(https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/4752), complaining about it not
being possible to pass multiple output arguments to a ufunc using
keyword arguments.
You can pass them all as positional arguments:
out1 = np.empty(1)
out2 = np.empty(1)
15 matches
Mail list logo