On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
> Just to throw in my two cents here. I feel that sometimes, features are
> tried out first elsewhere (possibly in scipy) and then brought down into
> numpy after sufficient shakedown time. So, in some cases, I wonder if the
> numpy version is
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Benjamin Root wrote:
> Just to throw in my two cents here. I feel that sometimes, features are
> tried out first elsewhere (possibly in scipy) and then brought down into
> numpy after sufficient shakedown time. So, in some cases, I wonder if the
> numpy version i
Just to throw in my two cents here. I feel that sometimes, features are
tried out first elsewhere (possibly in scipy) and then brought down into
numpy after sufficient shakedown time. So, in some cases, I wonder if the
numpy version is actually more refined than the scipy version? Of course,
there
Stefan van der Walt writes:
> On 2014-10-27 15:26:58, D. Michael McFarland wrote:
>> What I would like to ask about is the situation this illustrates, where
>> both NumPy and SciPy provide similar functionality (sometimes identical,
>> to judge by the documentation). Is there some guidance on w
To make the last point more concrete the implementation could look
something like this (note that I didn't test it and that it still
takes some work):
def bmat(obj, ldict=None, gdict=None):
return matrix(stack(obj, ldict, gdict))
def stack(obj, ldict=None, gdict=None):
# the old bmat co
