Re: [Numpy-discussion] NPY_SEPARATE_COMPILATION and RELAXED_STRIDES_CHECKING

2015-04-03 Thread Nathaniel Smith
IIRC there allegedly exist platforms where separate compilation doesn't work right? I'm happy to get rid of it if no one speaks up to defend such platforms, though, we can always add it back later. One case was for statically linking numpy into the interpreter, but I'm skeptical about how much we s

Re: [Numpy-discussion] NPY_SEPARATE_COMPILATION and RELAXED_STRIDES_CHECKING

2015-04-03 Thread Charles R Harris
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > Hi All, > > Just to raise the question if these two options should be removed at some > point? The current default value for both is 0, so we have separate > compilation and relaxed strides checking by default. > > Oops, default value is 1

[Numpy-discussion] NPY_SEPARATE_COMPILATION and RELAXED_STRIDES_CHECKING

2015-04-03 Thread Charles R Harris
Hi All, Just to raise the question if these two options should be removed at some point? The current default value for both is 0, so we have separate compilation and relaxed strides checking by default. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Disc

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Advanced indexing: "fancy" vs. orthogonal

2015-04-03 Thread Stephan Hoyer
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Unfortunately, AFAICT this means our only options here are to have > some kind of backcompat break in numpy, some kind of backcompat break > in pandas, or to do nothing and continue indefinitely with the status > quo where the same indexing

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Advanced indexing: "fancy" vs. orthogonal

2015-04-03 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Apr 1, 2015 2:17 AM, "R Hattersley" wrote: > > There are two different interpretations in common use of how to handle > multi-valued (array/sequence) indexes. The numpy style is to consider all > multi-valued indices together which allows arbitrary points to be extracted. > The orthogonal st

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Advanced indexing: "fancy" vs. orthogonal

2015-04-03 Thread Eric Firing
On 2015/04/03 7:59 AM, Jaime Fernández del Río wrote: > I have an all-Pyhton implementation of an OrthogonalIndexer class, > loosely based on Stephan's code plus some axis remapping, that provides > all the needed functionality for getting and setting with orthogonal > indices. Excellent! > > Wou

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Advanced indexing: "fancy" vs. orthogonal

2015-04-03 Thread Stephan Hoyer
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Jaime Fernández del Río < jaime.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have an all-Pyhton implementation of an OrthogonalIndexer class, loosely > based on Stephan's code plus some axis remapping, that provides all the > needed functionality for getting and setting with orthogo

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Advanced indexing: "fancy" vs. orthogonal

2015-04-03 Thread Jaime Fernández del Río
I have an all-Pyhton implementation of an OrthogonalIndexer class, loosely based on Stephan's code plus some axis remapping, that provides all the needed functionality for getting and setting with orthogonal indices. Would those interested rather see it as a gist to play around with, or as a PR ad

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Advanced indexing: "fancy" vs. orthogonal

2015-04-03 Thread Pauli Virtanen
03.04.2015, 04:09, josef.p...@gmail.com kirjoitti: [clip] > I think numpy indexing is not too difficult and follows a consistent > pattern, and I completely avoid mixing slices and index arrays with > ndim > 2. > > I think it should be DOA, except as a discussion topic for numpy 3000. If you chan