[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.12.1 released

Hi All, I'm pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.12.1. NumPy 1.12.1 supports Python 2.7 and 3.4 - 3.6 and fixes bugs and regressions found in NumPy 1.12.0. In particular, the regression in f2py constant parsing is fixed. Wheels for Linux, Windows, and OSX can be found on pypi. Archives can

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: xtensor 0.7.1 numpy-style syntax in C++ with bindings to numpy arrays

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Sylvain Corlay wrote: > Hi All, > > On behalf of the xtensor development team, I am pleased to announce the > releases of > > - xtensor 0.7.1 https://github.com/QuantStack/xtensor/ > - xtensor-python 0.6.0 https://github.com/QuantStack/xtensor-

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy pre-release 1.12.1rc1

Hi All, I'm pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.12.1rc1. NumPy 1.12.1rc1 supports Python 2.7 and 3.4 - 3.6 and fixes bugs and regressions found in NumPy 1.12.0. In particular, the regression in f2py constant parsing is fixed. Wheels for Linux, Windows, and OSX can be found on pypi. Archive

Re: [Numpy-discussion] automatically avoiding temporary arrays

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Benjamin Root wrote: > What's the timeline for the next release? I have the perfect usecase for > this (Haversine calculation on large arrays that takes up ~33% of one of my > processing scripts). However, to test it out, I have a huge dependency mess > to wade t

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Removal of some numpy files

On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 7:48 AM, David Cournapeau > wrote: > > tools/win32build is used to build the so-called superpack installers, > which > > we don't build anymore AFAIK > > > > tools/numpy-macosx-installer is used to build the .dmg for

[Numpy-discussion] Removal of some numpy files

Hi All, While looking through the numpy tools directory I noticed some scripts that look outdated that might be candidates for removal: 1. tools/numpy-macosx-installer/ 2. tools/win32build/ Does anyone know if either of those are stlll relevant? Cheers, Chuck

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Could we simplify backporting?

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Evgeni Burovski wrote: > > I really don't like the double work and the large amount of noise coming > > from backporting every other PR to NumPy very quickly. For SciPy the > policy > > is: > > - anyone can set the "backport-candidate" label > > - the release

[Numpy-discussion] Eric Wieser added to NumPy team.

Hi All, I'm pleased to welcome Eric to the NumPy team. There is a pile of pending PRs that grows every day and we are counting on Eric will help us keep it in check ;) Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy

[Numpy-discussion] Marten van Kerkwijk added to numpy team.

Hi All, I'm pleased to welcome Marten to the numpy team. His reviews of PRs have been very useful in the past and I am happy that he has accepted our invitation to join the team. Cheers, Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.or

Re: [Numpy-discussion] question about long doubles on ppc64el

On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 11:00 PM, Thomas Caswell wrote: > Folks, > > Over at h5py we are trying to get a release out and have discovered (via > debian) that on ppc64el there is an apparent disagreement between the size > of a native long double according to hdf5 and numpy. > > For all of the gore

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.12.0 release

Hi All, I'm pleased to announce the NumPy 1.12.0 release. This release supports Python 2.7 and 3.4-3.6. Wheels for all supported Python versions may be downloaded from PiPY , the tarball and zip files may be downloaded from Github

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Deprecating matrices.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 5:31 PM, CJ Carey wrote: > I agree with Ralf; coupling these changes to sparse is a bad idea. > > I think that scipy.sparse will be an important consideration during the > deprecation process, though, perhaps as an indicator of how painful the > transition might be for thir

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Deprecating matrices.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Ralf Gommers >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Deprecating matrices.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Ralf Gommers >> wrote: >> >>> >>&g

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Deprecating matrices.

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Todd wrote: > >> >> >> On Jan 6, 2017 20:28, "Ralf Gommers" wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 2:21 PM, CJ Carey >> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Ralf Gommers >>> wrote: >>> >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Deprecating matrices.

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 6:37 PM, wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 8:28 PM, Ralf Gommers > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 2:21 PM, CJ Carey >> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Ralf Gommers >>> wrote: >>> This sounds like a reasonable idea. Timeline could be s

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Default type for functions that accumulate integers

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Sebastian Berg wrote: > On Mo, 2017-01-02 at 18:46 -0800, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Charles R Harris > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > Currently functions like trace u

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Deprecating matrices.

On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 7:12 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 7:26 PM, wrote: > [...] > >> How about dropping python 2 support at the same time, then we can all be

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Deprecating matrices.

On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 7:26 PM, wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Ralf Gommers >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Cha

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Deprecating matrices.

On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 7:26 PM, wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Ralf Gommers > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Charles R Harris < >> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>&g

[Numpy-discussion] Default type for functions that accumulate integers

Hi All, Currently functions like trace use the C long type as the default accumulator for integer types of lesser precision: dtype : dtype, optional > Determines the data-type of the returned array and of the accumulator > where the elements are summed. If dtype has the value None and `a`

[Numpy-discussion] Deprecating matrices.

Hi All, Just throwing this click bait out for discussion. Now that the `@` operator is available and things seem to be moving towards Python 3, especially in the classroom, we should consider the real possibility of deprecating the matrix type and later removing it. No doubt there are old scripts

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.12.0rc2 release.

Hi All, I'm pleased to announce the NumPy 1.12.0rc2 New Year's release. This release supports Python 2.7 and 3.4-3.6. Wheels for all supported Python versions may be downloaded from PiPY , the tarball and zip files may be downloaded from

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.12.0rc1

Hi All, I am pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.12.0rc1. This release supports Python 2.7 and 3.4 - 3.6 and is the result of 406 pull requests submitted by 139 contributors and comprises a large number of fixes and improvements. Among the many improvements it is difficult to pick out ju

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.11.3 release.

Hi All, I'm please to annouce the release of NumPy 1.11.3. This is a one bug fix release to take care of a bug that could corrupt large files opened in append mode and then used as an argument to ndarray.tofile. Thanks to Pavel Potocek for the fix. Cheers, Chuck -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE---

Re: [Numpy-discussion] PyPI source files.

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > It seems that PyPI will only accept one source file at this time, e.g., > > numpy-1.11.3.zip and numpy-1.11.3.tar.gz a

[Numpy-discussion] PyPI source files.

Hi All, It seems that PyPI will only accept one source file at this time, e.g., numpy-1.11.3.zip and numpy-1.11.3.tar.gz are considered duplicates. Does anyone know if this is intentional or a bug on the PyPI end? It makes sense in a screwy sort of way. Chuck _

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.12.0b1 released.

Hi All, I'm pleased to annouce the release of NumPy 1.12.0b1. This release supports Python 2.7 and 3.4 - 3.6 and is the result of 388 pull requests submitted by 133 contributors. It is quite sizeable and rather than put the release notes inline I've attached them as a file and they may also be vi

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.12.x branched

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Frédéric Bastien < frederic.bast...@gmail.com> wrote: > My change about numpy.mean in float16 aren't in the doc. > > Should I make a PR again numpy master or maintenance/1.12.x? > Make it against master. I may cut and paste the content into a bigger PR I will merg

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.12.x branched

1.12.x branched >> Message-ID:<1478451372.3875.5.ca...@sipsolutions.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> On Sa, 2016-11-05 at 17:04 -0600, Charles R Harris wrote: >> >>> >Hi All, >>> > >>> >Numpy 1.12.x has b

Re: [Numpy-discussion] __numpy_ufunc__

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 1:08 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Charles R Harris < >> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wr

Re: [Numpy-discussion] __numpy_ufunc__

On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > Hi All, > > For those interested in continuing the __numpy_ufunc__ saga, there is a pull > request enabling it <https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/8247>. Likely we > will want to make some changes up front before

[Numpy-discussion] __numpy_ufunc__

Hi All, For those interested in continuing the __numpy_ufunc__ saga, there is a pull request enabling it . Likely we will want to make some changes up front before merging that, so some discussion is in order. Chuck ___

[Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.12.x branched

Hi All, Numpy 1.12.x has been branched and the 1.13 development branch is open. It would be helpful if folks could review the release notes as it is likely I've missed something. I'd like to make the first beta release in a couple of days. Chuck ___ Nu

[Numpy-discussion] Branching NumPy 1.12.x

Hi All, I'm thinking that it is time to branch NumPy 1.12.x. I haven't got everything in it that I would have liked, in particular __numpy_ufunc__, but I think there is plenty of material and not branching is holding up some of the more risky stuff. My current thoughts on __numpy_ufunc__ is that

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Using numpy.rint() with scalars

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Yuri Sukhov wrote: > Hi all, > > According to the documentation for numpy.rint() ( > https://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/generated/numpy.rint.html), > it's a ufunc that accepts an array-like object as an input. > > But it also works with scalar inputs. Could

Re: [Numpy-discussion] missing from contributor list?

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Sturla Molden wrote: > Why am I missing from the contributor hist here? > > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/master/numpy/_ > build_utils/src/apple_sgemv_fix.c > > > You still show up in the commit log of if you follow the file ``` git log --follow numpy/_build_

Re: [Numpy-discussion] __numpy_ufunc__

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Stephan Hoyer wrote: > Recall that I think we wanted to rename this to __array_ufunc__, so we > could change the function signature: https://github.com/numpy/ > numpy/issues/5986 > > I'm still a little nervous about this. Chunk -- what is your proposal for > reso

Re: [Numpy-discussion] __numpy_ufunc__

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Marten van Kerkwijk < m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Chuck, > > I've revived my Quantity PRs that use __numpy_ufunc__ but is it > correct that at present in *dev, one cannot use it? > It's not enabled yet. Chuck __

Re: [Numpy-discussion] __numpy_ufunc__

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Stephan Hoyer wrote: > I'm happy to revisit the __numpy_ufunc__ discussion (I still want to see > it happen!), but I don't recall scalars being a point of contention. > The __numpy_ufunc__ functionality is the last bit I want for 1.12.0, the rest of the remaining

[Numpy-discussion] __numpy_ufunc__

Hi All, Does anyone remember discussion of numpy scalars apropos __numpy_ufunc__? Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

[Numpy-discussion] Numpy scalar integers to negative scalar integer powers.

Hi All, I've put up a PR to deal with the numpy scalar integer powers at https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/8221. Note that for now everything goes through the np.power function. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https:

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy integers to integer powers again again

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 1:39 PM, wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Stephan Hoyer wrote: >> >>> I am also concerned about add

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy integers to integer powers again again

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > [...] > > What I have been concerned about are the follow combinations that > currently > > return floats > > > > num: , exp: , res: >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy integers to integer powers again again

2016 at 4:30 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> > Hi All, >> > >> > I've been thinking about this some (a lot) more and have an alternate >> > proposal for the behavior of the `**` ope

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Intel random number package

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:41 PM, Robert Kern wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > There is a proposed random number package PR now up on github: > https://githu

[Numpy-discussion] Intel random number package

Hi All, There is a proposed random number package PR now up on github: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/8209. It is from oleksandr-pavlyk and implements the number random number package using MKL for increased speed. I think we are definitely interested in

[Numpy-discussion] Numpy integers to integer powers again again

Hi All, I've been thinking about this some (a lot) more and have an alternate proposal for the behavior of the `**` operator - if both base and power are numpy/python scalar integers, convert to python integers and call the `**` operator. That would solve both the precision and compatibi

Re: [Numpy-discussion] fpower ufunc

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 1:45 AM, Sebastian Berg wrote: > On Do, 2016-10-20 at 21:38 -0600, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Nathaniel Smith > > wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Charles R Harris > > >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] fpower ufunc

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I've put up a preliminary PR for the proposed fpower ufunc. Apart from > > adding more tests and documentation, I&#x

[Numpy-discussion] fpower ufunc

Hi All, I've put up a preliminary PR for the proposed fpower ufunc. Apart from adding more tests and documentation, I'd like to settle a few other things. The first is the name, two names have been proposed and we should settle on one - fpower (short)

[Numpy-discussion] assert_allclose equal_nan default value.

Hi All, Just a heads up that there is a PR changing the default value of `equal_nan` to `True` in the `assert_allclose` test function. The `equal_nan` argument was previously ineffective due to a bug that has recently been fixed. The current default value of `False` is not backward compatible and

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to negative integer powers, time for a decision.

On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Krisztián Horváth wrote: > Hello, > > I think it should be consistent with Python3. So, it should give back a > float. > > Best regards, > Krisztian > > Can't do that and also return integers for positive powers. It isn't possible to have behavior completely compat

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to negative integer powers, time for a decision.

On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 4:40 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Charles R Harris > >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to negative integer powers, time for a decision.

On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 4:40 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > The time for NumPy 1.12.0 approaches and I like to have a final decision > on > > the treatment of integers to negative intege

[Numpy-discussion] Integers to negative integer powers, time for a decision.

Hi All, The time for NumPy 1.12.0 approaches and I like to have a final decision on the treatment of integers to negative integer powers with the `**` operator. The two alternatives looked to be *Raise an error for arrays and numpy scalars, including 1 and -1 to negative powers.* *Pluses* -

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.11.2 released

*Hi All,* I'm pleased to announce the release of Numpy 1.11.2. This release supports Python 2.6 - 2.7, and 3.2 - 3.5 and fixes bugs and regressions found in Numpy 1.11.1. Wheels for Linux, Windows, and OSX can be found on PyPI. Sources are available on both PyPI and Sourceforge

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Dropping sourceforge for releases.

On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Vincent Davis wrote: > +1, I am very skeptical of anything on SourceForge, it negatively impacts > my opinion of any project that requires me to download from sourceforge. > > > On Saturday, October 1, 2016, Charles R Harris > wrote: > >

[Numpy-discussion] Dropping sourceforge for releases.

Hi All, Ralf has suggested dropping sourceforge as a NumPy release site. There was discussion of doing that some time back but we have not yet done it. Now that we put wheels up on PyPI for all supported architectures source forge is not needed. I note that there are still some 15,000 downloads a

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Vendorize tempita

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Charles R Harris < charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Evgeni Burovski < >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Vendorize tempita

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Charles R Harris < charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Evgeni Burovski < > evgeny.burovs...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Vendorize tempita

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Evgeni Burovski wrote: > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Benjamin Root > wrote: > >> > >> This is the first I am hearing of tempita (looks t

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Vendorize tempita

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Benjamin Root wrote: > This is the first I am hearing of tempita (looks to be a templating > language). How is it a dependency of numpy? Do I now need tempita in order > to use numpy, or is it a build-time-only dependency? > Build time only. The virtue of tempita

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Vendorize tempita

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Stephan Hoyer wrote: > One way to do this is to move to vendorized dependencies into an submodule > of numpy itself (e.g., sklearn.externals.joblib, though maybe even a little > more indirection than that would be valuable to make it clear that it isn't > part of

[Numpy-discussion] Vendorize tempita

Hi All, There is a PR to vendorize tempita. This removes tempita as a dependency and simplifies some things. Feedback on this step is welcome. One question is whether the package should be renamed to something like `npy_tempita`, as otherwise installed te

[Numpy-discussion] testing

Testing if this gets posted... Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.11.2rc1

Hi All, I'm pleased to announce the release of Numpy 1.11.2rc1. This release supports Python 2.6 - 2.7, and 3.2 - 3.5 and fixes bugs and regressions found in Numpy 1.11.1. Wheels for Linux, Windows, and OSX can be found on PyPI. Sources are available on both PyPI and Sourceforge

[Numpy-discussion] gmane

Hi All, Looks like gmane is going down . Does anyone know of an alternative for searching and referencing the NumPy mail archives? Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.11.2

On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:20 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote: > what is the status for this? i checked on GH and > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/milestone/43 seems to report no issue > pending. the reason i'm asking is that i still have to package 1.11.1 > for debian, but i dont want to do all the work and

[Numpy-discussion] Correct error of invalid axis arguments.

Hi All, At the moment there are two error types raised when invalid axis arguments are encountered: IndexError and ValueError. I prefer ValueError for arguments, IndexError seems more appropriate when the bad axis value is used as an index. In any case, having mixed error types is inconvenient, bu

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy.distutils issue

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Pavlyk, Oleksandr < > oleksandr.pav...@intel.com> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> >> >> According to the documentation page: >> >> &g

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy.distutils issue

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Pavlyk, Oleksandr < oleksandr.pav...@intel.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > > > According to the documentation page: > > > >http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/distutils.html > > > > Function add_library allows the following keywords: > > extra_f77_compile

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.11.2

Aug 3, 2016 at 9:09 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I would like to release Numpy 1.11.2rc1 this weekend. It will contain a > few > > small fixes and enhancements for windows and the last Scipy release. If > > there are any pending PRs that you

[Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.11.2

Hi All, I would like to release Numpy 1.11.2rc1 this weekend. It will contain a few small fixes and enhancements for windows and the last Scipy release. If there are any pending PRs that you think should go in or be backported for this release, please speak up. Chuck _

Re: [Numpy-discussion] StackOverflow documentation

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 5:47 AM, Jaime Fernández del Río < jaime.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > StackOverflow now also has documentation, and there already is a NumPy tag: > > http://stackoverflow.com/documentation/numpy > > Not sure what, if anything, do we want to do with this, nor how to handle > not

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Custom Dtype/Units discussion

Evening would work for me. Dinner? On Jul 13, 2016 2:43 PM, "Ryan May" wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Chris Barker > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 8:12 PM, Nathan Goldbaum >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Maybe this can be an informal BOF session? >>> >> >> or maybe a formal BoF? a

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Custom Dtype/Units discussion

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Chris Barker wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 8:12 PM, Nathan Goldbaum > wrote: > >> >> Maybe this can be an informal BOF session? >> > > or maybe a formal BoF? after all, how formal do they get? > > Anyway, it was my understanding that we really needed to

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Custom Dtype/Units discussion

On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Hi Ryan, > > I'll be and SciPy and I'd love to talk about this :-). Things are a > bit hectic for me on Mon/Tue/Wed between the Python Compilers Workshop > and my talk, but do you want to meet up Thursday maybe? > > I'll be at scipy also

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Accelerate or OpenBLAS for numpy / scipy wheels?

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 9:46 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > I just succeeded in getting an automated dual arch build of numpy and > scipy, using OpenBLAS. See the last three build jobs in these two > build matrices: > > https://travis-ci.org/matthew-brett/numpy-wheels/builds/140388119 > http

[Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.11.1 release

Hi All, I'm pleased to announce the release of Numpy 1.11.1. This release supports Python 2.6 - 2.7, and 3.2 - 3.5 and fixes bugs and regressions found in Numpy 1.11.0 as well as making several build related improvements. Wheels for Linux, Windows, and OSX can be found on PyPI. Sources are availa

[Numpy-discussion] block function

Hi All, I've updated Stefan Otte's block function enhancement at https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/7768. Could folks interested in that function review the proposed grammar for the creation of blocked arrays. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list Nu

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Design feedback solicitation

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Robert Kern wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Pavlyk, Oleksandr < > oleksandr.pav...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I am new to this list, so I will start with an introduction. My name is > Oleksandr Pavlyk. I now work at Intel Corp. on the Intel Di

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers, let's make a decision

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Marten van Kerkwijk < m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Chuck, > > I consider either proposal an improvement, but among the two I favour > returning float for `**`, because, like for `/`, it ensures one gets > closest to the (mathematically) true answer in most

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ENH: compute many inner products quickly

On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Stephan Hoyer wrote: > If possible, I'd love to add new functions for "generalized ufunc" linear > algebra, and then deprecate (or at least discourage) using the older > versions with inferior broadcasting rules. Adding a new keyword arg means > we'll be stuck with

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers, let's make a decision

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Jun 4, 2016 7:23 PM, "Charles R Harris" > wrote: > > > [...] > > We could always try the float option and see what breaks, but I expect > there is a fair amount of code using small exponents like 2 or

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers, let's make a decision

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 7:54 PM, wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 6:17 PM, wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 4,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers, let's make a decision

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 6:17 PM, wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 5:27 PM, wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 6:1

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers, let's make a decision

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 5:27 PM, wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 2:07 PM, V. Armando Sole wrote: >> > Also in favor of 2. Always return a float for '**' >> >> Even if we did want to switch to this, it's such a major >> backwards-inc

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers, let's make a decision

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > Hi All, > > I've made a new post so that we can make an explicit decision. AFAICT, the > two proposals are > > >1. Integers to negative integer powers raise an error. >2. Integers to integer po

[Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers, let's make a decision

Hi All, I've made a new post so that we can make an explicit decision. AFAICT, the two proposals are 1. Integers to negative integer powers raise an error. 2. Integers to integer powers always results in floats. My own sense is that 1. would be closest to current behavior and using a floa

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:33 PM, R Schumacher wrote: > At 01:15 PM 5/24/2016, you wrote: > > On 5/24/2016 3:57 PM, Eric Moore wrote: > > Changing np.arange(10)**3 to have a non-integer dtype seems like a big > change. > > > > What about np.arange(100)**5? > > > Interesting, one warning per instan

[Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.11.1rc1 release

Hi All, I am pleased to announce the release of Numpy 1.11.1rc1. The sources may be found on sourceforge and wheels for OS X, Windows, and Linux will be available on pypi sometime in the next few days. The pypi release is delayed due

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> > >> So I guess what makes this tricky is that: > &

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Charles R Harris < charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> So I guess what makes this tricky is that: >> >> - We want the behavior to the same for multiple-elem

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > So I guess what makes this tricky is that: > > - We want the behavior to the same for multiple-element arrays, > single-element arrays, zero-dimensional arrays, and scalars -- the > shape of the data shouldn't affect the semantics of ** >

[Numpy-discussion] Integers to integer powers

Hi All, There are currently several pull requests apropos integer arrays/scalars to integer powers and, because the area is messy and involves tradeoffs, I'd like to see some discussion here on the list before proceeding. *Scalars in 1.10* In [1]: 1 ** -1 Out[1]: 1.0 In [2]: int16(1) ** -1 Out[

[Numpy-discussion] Scipy 2016 attending

Hi All, Out of curiosity, who all here intends to be at Scipy 2016? Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Calling C code that assumes SIMD aligned data.

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Øystein Schønning-Johansen < oyste...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for your answer, Francesc. Knowing that there is no numpy solution > saves the work of searching for this. I've not tried the solution described > at SO, but it looks like a real performance killer. I'

[Numpy-discussion] Preparing for 1.12 branch

Hi All, This is just a request that numpy reviewers tag PRs that they think merit inclusion in 1.12 with `1.12.0 release`. The tag doesn't mean that the PR need be in 1.12, but it will help prioritize the review process. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion maili

Re: [Numpy-discussion] linux wheels coming soon

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Matthew Brett > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 6:11 PM, Matthew Brett > wrote: > >> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 6:39 AM, Peter Cock > wrote: > >>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 3:02 AM, Robert T. McGi

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >