Re: [Numpy-discussion] The process I intend to follow for any proposed changes to NumPy

Hi Travis, On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: > Hey all, > > I just wanted to clarify, that I am very excited about a few ideas I have > --- but I don't have time myself to engage in the community process to get > these changes into NumPy. However, those are real processe

Re: [Numpy-discussion] [RFC] should we argue for a matrix power operator, @@?

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Fernando Perez wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Aron Ahmadia wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >>> >>> The thread so far, it sounds like the consensus answer is "meh, >>> whatever". So I'm thinking we should just d

Re: [Numpy-discussion] argsort speed

On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 11:09 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 10:35 PM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon

Re: [Numpy-discussion] argsort speed

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Julian Taylor > wrote: >> >> On 17.02.2014 15:18, Francesc Alted wrote: >> > On 2/17/14, 1:08 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Daπid wrote: >> >>> On 16 Febru

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Masked arrays: Rationale for "False convention"

On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:29 AM, Robert Kern wrote: > On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 3:57 AM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: > >> I see, that makes sense. So to remember this, the rule is: >> >> "Specify elements that you want to get masked using True in 'mask'".

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Masked arrays: Rationale for "False convention"

On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Eric Firing wrote: > On 2013/09/30 4:05 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Ondřej Čertík >>&

[Numpy-discussion] Masked arrays: Rationale for "False convention"

Hi, What is the rationale for using False in 'mask' for elements that should be included? http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/maskedarray.generic.html As opposed to using True for elements that should be included, which is what I was intuitively expecting when I started using the masked ar

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.1 release

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: > Hi, > > A big thanks for that release. > > I also think it would be useful to do a release candidate about this. This > release changed the behavior releated to python long and broke a test in > Theano. Nothing important, but we could hav

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.1 release

On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: > Hi, > > I'm pleased to announce the availability of the final NumPy 1.7.1 release. > > Sources and binary installers can be found at > https://sourceforge.net/projects/numpy/files/NumPy/1.7.1/ > > Only three

Re: [Numpy-discussion] datetime64 1970 issue

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Bob Nnamtrop wrote: > It would seem that before 1970 the dates do not include the time zone > adjustment while after 1970 they do. This is the source of the extra 7 > hours. > > In [21]: np.datetime64('1970-01-01 00') > Out[21]: numpy.datetime64('1970-01-01T00:00-0

Re: [Numpy-discussion] datetime64 1970 issue

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Sebastian Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2013-04-17 at 09:07 -0700, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Zachary Ploskey >> > wrote: >> > I'd say we need some m

Re: [Numpy-discussion] datetime64 1970 issue

On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Bob Nnamtrop wrote: > I am curious if others have noticed an issue with datetime64 at the > beginning of 1970. First: > > In [144]: (np.datetime64('1970-01-01') - np.datetime64('1969-12-31')) > Out[144]: numpy.timedelta64(1,'D') > > OK this look fine, they are one

[Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.1 release

Hi, I'm pleased to announce the availability of the final NumPy 1.7.1 release. Sources and binary installers can be found at https://sourceforge.net/projects/numpy/files/NumPy/1.7.1/ Only three simple bugs were fixed since 1.7.1rc1 (#3166, #3179, #3187). I would like to thank everybody who cont

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.1rc1 release

On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: [...] > Yes. I created an issue here for them to test it: > > https://github.com/scikit-learn/scikit-learn/issues/1809 > > Just to make sure. There doesn't seem to be any more problems, so I am releasin

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Any plans for windows 64-bit installer for 1.7?

Hi Matthew, On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi Ondrej, > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Matthew Brett &

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.1rc1 release

On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I'm pleased to announce the availability of the first release candidate of >> NumPy 1.7.1rc1. >> >

[Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.1rc1 release

Hi, I'm pleased to announce the availability of the first release candidate of NumPy 1.7.1rc1. Sources and binary installers can be found at https://sourceforge.net/projects/numpy/files/NumPy/1.7.1rc1/ Please test it and report any bugs. It fixes a few bugs, listed below. I would like to thank

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.7.1

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 1:02 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > The Numpy 1.7.1 release process seems to have stalled. My apologies for that. > What do we need to > finish up to get it going again? I think it would be nice to shoot for a > release maybe the weekend after next. I think just the rele

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Scheduling the 1.7.1 and 1.8 releases

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:06 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> > Hi All, >> > >> > There are now some 14 non-merge commits in the 1.7.x branch including >> > the >> > critical

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.7.1

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Ralf Gommers > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >>> >>> When should we put out 1.7.1? Discuss ;) >> >> >> When we have X times more fixes in maintenanc

Re: [Numpy-discussion] a question about freeze on numpy 1.7.0

Hi Gelin, On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Gelin Yan wrote: > Hi All > > When I used numpy 1.7.0 with cx_freeze 4.3.1 on windows, I quickly > found out even a simple "import numpy" may lead to program failed with > following exception: > > "AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute '

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Fwd: Package: scipy-0.11.0-0.1.rc2.fc18 Tag: f18-updates-candidate Status: failed Built by: orion

Orion, On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 09/21/2012 11:41 AM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: >> >> Hi Orion, >> >> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Orion Poplawski >> wrote: >>> >>> This is a plea for some help. We've

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How to upload to pypi

David, On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 6:46 AM, David Cournapeau wrote: > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 5:49 AM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have uploaded the NumPy 1.7.0 source distribution to pypi: >> >> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/numpy/1.7.0 >> >&

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How to upload to pypi

Hi Robert, On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Robert Kern wrote: > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 5:49 AM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have uploaded the NumPy 1.7.0 source distribution to pypi: >> >> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/numpy/1.7.0 >> >&

[Numpy-discussion] How to upload to pypi

Hi, I have uploaded the NumPy 1.7.0 source distribution to pypi: http://pypi.python.org/pypi/numpy/1.7.0 I did it by uploading the file PKG-INFO from numpy-1.7.0.tar.gz. It said "Error processing form. Form Failure; reset form submission" about 3x times, but on the 4th try it went through. I rep

[Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.0 release

Hi, I'm pleased to announce the availability of the final release of NumPy 1.7.0. Sources and binary installers can be found at https://sourceforge.net/projects/numpy/files/NumPy/1.7.0/ This release is equivalent to the 1.7.0rc2 release, since no more problems were found. For release notes see b

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.0rc2 release

Thanks Frédéric and Christoph for the feedback. Looks like there are no further problems, so I will go ahead and do the final release today. Ondrej ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: pandas 0.10.1 is released

Hi Wes, On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Wes McKinney wrote: > hi all, > > We've released pandas 0.10.1 which includes many bug fixes from > 0.10.0 (including a number of issues with the new file parser, > e.g. reading multiple files in separate threads), various > performance improvements, and m

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Modern Fortran vs NumPy syntax

Frédéric, On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: > Hi, > > I just read a paper[1] that compare python with numpy or pypy vs c++ and > fortran from a code, memory and speed point of view. The python code was > still better as you can't have list of ndarray in fortran and some oth

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Any plans for windows 64-bit installer for 1.7?

On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote: > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Matthew Brett > wrote: >> a) If we cannot build Scipy now, it may or may not be acceptable to >> release numpy now. I think it is, you (Ralf) think it isn't, we >> haven't discussed that. It

[Numpy-discussion] Modern Fortran vs NumPy syntax

Hi, I have recently setup a page about modern Fortran: http://fortran90.org/ and in particular, it has a long section with side by side syntax examples of Python/NumPy vs Fortran: http://fortran90.org/src/rosetta.html I would be very interested if some NumPy gurus would provide me feedback. I

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Any plans for windows 64-bit installer for 1.7?

On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Matthew Brett > wrote: >> >> >> >> Can we defer the Scipy build until after the Numpy build? >> > >> > >> > That doesn't sound like a good idea to me. >> >> I must say I'm a little confused as to how we'r

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Any plans for windows 64-bit installer for 1.7?

On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Matthew Brett >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I think you will need a developer's license for MKL for Numpy. Ralf - >>> any ETA for those? >> >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Any plans for windows 64-bit installer for 1.7?

On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn >> wrote: >>> On 02/07/2013 12:16 AM, Matthew Brett wrote: >> [...] >>>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Will numpy 1.7.0 final be binary compatible with the rc?

On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:37 AM, Peter Cock wrote: > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Peter Cock >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello al

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Any plans for windows 64-bit installer for 1.7?

Christoph, On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote: [...] >> In order not to leave this discussion without a resolution: >> >> Christophe - would you allow us to distribute your numpy binaries for >> 1.7 from the numpy sourceforge page? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Matthew > > > I am OK wit

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Any plans for windows 64-bit installer for 1.7?

On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote: > On 02/07/2013 12:16 AM, Matthew Brett wrote: [...] >> Can you clarify the people you think will get stuck? I think I'm >> right in saying that anyone with a C extension should be able to build >> them against numpy, by installing the f

[Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.0rc2 release

Hi, I'm pleased to announce the availability of the second release candidate of NumPy 1.7.0rc2. Sources and binary installers can be found at https://sourceforge.net/projects/numpy/files/NumPy/1.7.0rc2/ We have fixed all issues known to us since the 1.7.0rc1 release. Please test this release an

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Will numpy 1.7.0 final be binary compatible with the rc?

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Peter Cock > wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> Will the numpy 1.7.0 'final' be binary compatible with the release >> candidate(s)? i.e. Would it be safe for me to release a Windows >> installer for a package

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Any plans for windows 64-bit installer for 1.7?

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote: > On 2/4/2013 12:59 PM, David Cournapeau wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Ondřej Čertík >> wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:57 AM, David Cournapeau wrote: >>>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 12

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Any plans for windows 64-bit installer for 1.7?

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:57 AM, David Cournapeau wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 12:28 AM, wrote: >>>> On Sat, Feb 2, 2013

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Any plans for windows 64-bit installer for 1.7?

On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:57 AM, David Cournapeau wrote: > On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 12:28 AM, wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Matthew Brett >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I see there is no Windows 64 bit installer for the 1.7 rc1. >> >> related: >> Is there any chance to get newer mingw or m

[Numpy-discussion] Issues to fix for 1.7.0rc2.

Hi, Here are the last open issues for 1.7, there are 9 of them: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues?milestone=3&sort=updated&state=open >From these, 3 are very simple PRs that I just posted. Let's polish these, get them in. I propose to release rc2 after that and if all is ok, do the final re

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Travis failures with no errors

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Ondřej Čertík >> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I found these recent weird "f

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Building Numpy 1.6.2 for Python 3.3 on Windows

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:20 PM, klo wrote: >> Actually, this isn't over. It builds fine, but when I try to import >> numpy I get error: > >> >> ... > > Sorry for the noise, after re-reading tracelog, I realized that I accidentally > removed "c:\python33\l

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Which Python to use for Mac binaries

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote: > Ondřej, Vincent, and Ralf (and others..) > > Thank you so much for doing all this -- it's a great service to the > MacPython community. Chris, thank you for your help as well! Ondrej ___

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Which Python to use for Mac binaries

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > Sure, no problem. For the part that needs to be built on 10.6 that is. > Vincent's box still has 10.5, right? Yes. Ondrej ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.sc

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Which Python to use for Mac binaries

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote: > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 10:23 PM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >>> http://www.commandlinefu.com/commands/view/2031/install-an-mpkg-from-the-command-line-on-osx >> >> This requires root access. Without sud

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Which Python to use for Mac binaries

On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:36 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 3:12 AM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Ralf Gommers >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 3:21

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Which Python to use for Mac binaries

On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote: > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: >> Is it possible to install the dmg images without root access from the >> command line? > > I've never tried, but it looks like you can: > &

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Which Python to use for Mac binaries

On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 3:21 AM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Currently the NumPy binaries are built using the pavement.py script, >> which uses the following Pythons: >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Which Python to use for Mac binaries

On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote: > On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: >>> Which exact Python do we need to use on Mac? Do we need to use the >>> binary installer from python.org? >> >> Yes, the one from python.org. >> >>> Or can I install it from

[Numpy-discussion] Which Python to use for Mac binaries

Hi, Currently the NumPy binaries are built using the pavement.py script, which uses the following Pythons: MPKG_PYTHON = { "2.5": ["/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.5/bin/python"], "2.6": ["/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.6/bin/python"], "2.7

Re: [Numpy-discussion] test failures when embedded (in matlab)

On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Robin wrote: > Hi All, > > When using Numpy from an embedded Python (Python embedded in a Matlab > mex function) I get a lot of test failures (see attached log). > > I am using CentOS 6.3, distribution packaged Python (2.6) and Numpy > (1.4.1). Running numpy tests f

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.0rc1 release

Hi Christoph, On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 5:46 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote: > Looks good so far. > > I tested numpy-MKL-1.7.0rc1.win-amd64-py2.7 with some packages that were > compiled with numpy 1.6.x > . > Ther

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.0rc1 release

Hi Neal, On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Neal Becker wrote: > Are release notes available? Yes. There are here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/numpy/files/NumPy/1.7.0rc1/ if you slide the page down a little bit (sf.net just shows the file README.txt). I am posting them here as well for refer

[Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.0rc1 release

Hi, I'm pleased to announce the availability of the first release candidate of NumPy 1.7.0rc1. Sources and binary installers can be found at https://sourceforge.net/projects/numpy/files/NumPy/1.7.0rc1/ We have fixed all issues known to us since the 1.7.0b2 release. The only remaining issue is a

Re: [Numpy-discussion] help with f2py

On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Aronne Merrelli wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to run f2py and running into some trouble. Starting from > http://www.scipy.org/Cookbook/F2Py, and the very simple 'Wrapping Hermite > Polynomial' example, I can get the pyf file created with no issues. The > system I am

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Many failing doctests - release blocker? Enable for default test runs?

Hi Matthew, On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > I noticed that enabling the doctests on the 1.7.x maintenance branch > caused lots and lots of doctest failures. > > (np-devel)[mb312@blair ~/dev_trees]$ python -c 'import numpy as np; > np.test(doctests=True)' > 1.7.0rc1

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Travis-CI stopped supporting Python 3.1, but added 3.3

On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:23 AM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I noticed that the 3.1 tests are now failing. After clarification with >> the Travis guys: >> >> https://groups.google.co

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Future of numpy (was: DARPA funding for Blaze and passing the NumPy torch)

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: > Hi Matthew, > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Matthew Brett > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> [Travis wrote...] >>> My strong suggestion is that development discussions of the project >>> continue

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Future of numpy (was: DARPA funding for Blaze and passing the NumPy torch)

Hi Matthew, On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > [Travis wrote...] >> My strong suggestion is that development discussions of the project continue >> on >> this list with consensus among the active participants being the goal for >> development. I don't think 100% con

Re: [Numpy-discussion] DARPA funding for Blaze and passing the NumPy torch

Hi Travis, On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:07 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: > Hello all, > > There is a lot happening in my life right now and I am spread quite thin > among the various projects that I take an interest in. In particular, I > am thrilled to publicly announce on this list that Contin

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Travis failures with no errors

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: > Hi, > > I found these recent weird "failures" in Travis, but I can't find any > problem with the log and all tests pass. Any ideas what is going on? > > https://travis-ci.org/numpy/numpy/jobs/3570123 > ht

[Numpy-discussion] Travis-CI stopped supporting Python 3.1, but added 3.3

Hi, I noticed that the 3.1 tests are now failing. After clarification with the Travis guys: https://groups.google.com/d/topic/travis-ci/02iRu6kmwY8/discussion I've submitted a fix to our .travis.yml (and backported to 1.7): https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/2850 https://github.com/numpy/numpy

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Status of the 1.7 release

tually been fixed even though the bug is still marked open? At least >> fixed in 1.7.x? >> >> On 15 Dec 2012 23:52, "Ondřej Čertík" wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> If you go to the issues for 1.7 and click "high priority": >>>

[Numpy-discussion] Status of the 1.7 release

Hi, If you go to the issues for 1.7 and click "high priority": https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues?labels=priority%3A+high&milestone=3&state=open you will see 3 issues as of right now. Two of those have PR attached. It's been a lot of work to get to this point and I'd like to thank all of you

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Failure in test_iterator.py at Travis

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > The top of the build log has the actual git command they used to check out > the source - it's some clever GitHub thing that gives the same thing as > pressing the green button would iirc. You could copy the commands from the > log to check

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Failure in test_iterator.py at Travis

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > I only checked this build: > https://secure.travis-ci.org/#!/certik/numpy/jobs/3656960 > But that log clearly shows 'python setup.py install' being used instead of > 'pip install'. How certain are you that your branch actually has my fix?

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Failure in test_iterator.py at Travis

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Ondřej Čertík >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> A

[Numpy-discussion] Failure in test_iterator.py at Travis

Hi, Another weird bug sometimes happen in numpy/core/tests/test_iterator.py, it looks like this: == FAIL: test_iterator.test_iter_array_cast -- Traceback (most r

[Numpy-discussion] Travis failures with no errors

Hi, I found these recent weird "failures" in Travis, but I can't find any problem with the log and all tests pass. Any ideas what is going on? https://travis-ci.org/numpy/numpy/jobs/3570123 https://travis-ci.org/numpy/numpy/jobs/3539549 https://travis-ci.org/numpy/numpy/jobs/3369629 Ondrej _

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy Trac migration

On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Pauli Virtanen wrote: > Hi, > > For those whom it may concern: Since the Numpy Trac -> Github migration > is complete, I went ahead and added redirects > > projects.scipy.org/numpy/register -> github.com/numpy/numpy/issues > projects.scipy.org/numpy/newticket -> git

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Weird Travis-CI bugs in the release 1.7.x branch

On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 8:14 AM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: > On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> On 4 Dec 2012 02:27, "Ondřej Čertík" wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I started to work on the release again and noticed weird

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Weird Travis-CI bugs in the release 1.7.x branch

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On 4 Dec 2012 02:27, "Ondřej Čertík" wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I started to work on the release again and noticed weird failures at >> Travis-CI: > […] >> File >> "/home/tra

[Numpy-discussion] Weird Travis-CI bugs in the release 1.7.x branch

Hi, I started to work on the release again and noticed weird failures at Travis-CI: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/2782 The first commit (8a18fc7) should not trigger this failure: == FAIL: test_iterator.test_iter_array_cas

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Should abs([nan]) be supported?

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote: >> >> The framework for catching errors relies on hardware flags getting set and >> our C code making the right calls to detect those flags. >> >> This has usually worked correctly in

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.7.0 release

> Hi all, > > Having looked at the README.txt and INSTALL.txt files on the > branch, I see no mention of which Python 3.x versions are supported: > > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/maintenance/1.7.x/README.txt > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/maintenance/1.7.x/INSTALL.txt > > Is NumPy 1.7

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.7.0 release

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: [...] > Here is a list of issues that need to be fixed before the release: > > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues?milestone=3&state=open > > If anyone wants to help, we just need to get through them and submit a > PR

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.7.0 release

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 4:18 AM, Gael Varoquaux wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 02:27:02PM -0800, Ondřej Čertík wrote: >> I successfully defended my Ph.D. thesis last Thursday, I just need to >> do some changes to it and submit it and I am done. > > Yey! Tag and releas

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.7.0 release

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Travis Oliphant >> wrote: >> > Hey all, >> > >> > Ondrej h

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.7.0 release

Hi, On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: > Hey all, > > Ondrej has been tied up finishing his PhD for the past several weeks. He is > defending his work shortly and should be available to continue to help with > the 1.7.0 release around the first of December.He and I hav

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Making numpy sensible: backward compatibility please

On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 2:16 AM, Gael Varoquaux wrote: > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 07:37:35PM -0600, Charles R Harris wrote: >> +1, I think we should endeavor to have a respectful and welcoming >> community. > >> With a bit of humour now and then among the old timers, no? Look, I've been >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.0b2 release

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I tested this new beta on Theano and discovered an interface change >>> that was not there i

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Fwd: Package: scipy-0.11.0-0.1.rc2.fc18 Tag: f18-updates-candidate Status: failed Built by: orion

Hi Orion, On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > This is a plea for some help. We've been having trouble getting scipy to > pass all of the tests in the Fedora 18 build with python 3.3 (although it > seems to build okay in Fedora 19). Below are the logs of the build. There >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.0b2 release

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Richard Hattersley >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> [First of all - thanks to everyone involved in the 1.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.0b2 release

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Richard Hattersley wrote: > Hi, > > [First of all - thanks to everyone involved in the 1.7 release. Especially > Ondřej - it takes a lot of time & energy to coordinate something like this.] > > Is there an up to date release schedule anywhere? The trac milestone st

[Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.0b2 release

Hi, I'm pleased to announce the availability of the second beta release of NumPy 1.7.0b2. Sources and binary installers can be found at https://sourceforge.net/projects/numpy/files/NumPy/1.7.0b2/ Please test this release and report any issues on the numpy-discussion mailing list. Since beta1, we

[Numpy-discussion] Status of fixing bugs for the 1.7.0rc1 release

Hi, I've finally finished review of https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/439 which back-ports all the PRs from master into the release branch and pushed it in. Here is the current status of bugs for the 1.7.0 release: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/396 I believe that for example a lot of

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Contiguity of result of astype changed - intentional?

Hi Matt, On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: Is this intended? Is there a performance reason to keep the same strides in 1.7.0? >>> >>> I believe that this could be because in 1.7.0, NumPy was changed so that >>> copying does not always default to "C-order" bu

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.7b1 API change cause big trouble

Hi Fred, On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I spent up to now 2 or 3 days making change to Theano to support numpy >> 1.7b1. But now, I just find an interface change that will need >> recoding a function,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Should abs([nan]) be supported?

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 8:38 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: > > There is an error context that controls how floating point signals are > handled. There is a separate control for underflow, overflow, divide by > zero, and invalid. IIRC, it was decided on this list a while ago to make > the defaul

[Numpy-discussion] Should abs([nan]) be supported?

Hi, When running the test suite, there are problems of this kind: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/394 which then causes for example the Debian buildbots tests to fail (https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/406). The problem is really simple: >>> from numpy import array, abs, nan >>> a =

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.7.0b1 release

On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 2:19 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote: > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Ondřej Čertík >> wrote: >>> If you could create issues at github: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues >>> that would

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Mysterious test_pareto failure on Travis

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 2:58 PM, wrote: > On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 1:48 PM, wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >>>> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Ondřej Čertík >>>&

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Mysterious test_pareto failure on Travis

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 1:48 PM, wrote: > On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Ondřej Čertík >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Ondřej Čertík >>> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 1

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Mysterious test_pareto failure on Travis

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: > On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:15 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >>> The last two Travis builds of master have failed consistently with the >>> same err

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Mysterious test_pareto failure on Travis

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: > On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:15 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> The last two Travis builds of master have failed consistently with the >> same error: >> http://travis-ci.org/#!/numpy/numpy/builds >> It looks like a re

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Mysterious test_pareto failure on Travis

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:15 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > The last two Travis builds of master have failed consistently with the > same error: > http://travis-ci.org/#!/numpy/numpy/builds > It looks like a real failure -- we're getting the same error on every > build variant, some sort of problem

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How to debug reference counting errors

On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote: > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Ondřej Čertík > wrote: >> >> Hi Dag, >> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 4:22 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn >> wrote: >> > On 08/31/2012 09:03 AM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: >

  1   2   >