Re: [Numpy-discussion] Possible bug in Numpy.convolve

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Thøger Emil Rivera-Thorsen < thoger.e...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear list; > > I am honestly not certain whether this, or the SciPy list, is the > appropriate place to post this; please let me know if I got it wrong. > > I am convolving a 1D data set containing a rel

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Fortran order in recarray.

On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Alex Rogozhnikov < alex.rogozhni...@yandex.ru> wrote: > Hi Matthew, > maybe it is not the best place to discuss problems of pandas, but to show > that I am not missing something, let's consider a simple example. > > # simplest DataFrame > x = pandas.DataFrame(dict

Re: [Numpy-discussion] PowerPC testing servers

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 3:55 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote: > >> > A recent post to the wheel-builders mailing list pointed out some >> > links to places providing free PowerPC hosting for open source >> > projects, if they agree to a submitted

[Numpy-discussion] offset in fill diagonal

Is there a simple way to fill in diagonal elements in an array for other than main diagonal? As far as I can see, the diagxxx functions that have offset can only read and not inplace modify, and the functions for modifying don't have offset and only allow changing the main diagonal. Usecase: crea

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Question about numpy.random.choice with probabilties

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:53 AM, wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:52 AM, Nadav Har'El wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 11:00 AM, aleba...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> Let's look at what the user asked this function, and what it returns: >>> User asks: please give me random p

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Question about numpy.random.choice with probabilties

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 4:52 AM, Nadav Har'El wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 11:00 AM, aleba...@gmail.com > wrote: > >> Let's look at what the user asked this function, and what it returns: >> >>> >>> User asks: please give me random pairs of the three items, where item 1 >>> has probability

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Question about numpy.random.choice with probabilties

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 6:58 PM, aleba...@gmail.com wrote: > > > 2017-01-17 22:13 GMT+01:00 Nadav Har'El : > >> >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 7:18 PM, aleba...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Nadav, >>> >>> I may be wrong, but I think that the result of the current >>> implementation is actually the

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Question about numpy.random.choice with probabilties

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Nadav Har'El wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 7:18 PM, aleba...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> Hi Nadav, >> >> I may be wrong, but I think that the result of the current implementation is actually the expected one. >> Using you example: probabilities for item 1, 2 and

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Fwd: Backslash operator A\b and np/sp.linalg.solve

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Ilhan Polat wrote: > > Note that you're proposing a new scipy feature (right?) on the numpy > list > > > This sounds like a good idea to me. As a former heavy Matlab user I > remember a lot of things to dislike, but "\" behavior was quite nice. > > Correct, I a

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Deprecating matrices.

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 something like: >>> >>> 1. Now: create new package, deprecate n

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Deprecating matrices.

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, >> >> Just throwing this click bait out for discussion. Now that the `@` >> operator is available and things seem to be moving towards Pyth

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

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > 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

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

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 3:39 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: > 'numpy.float32'> > > num: , exp: , res:

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

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Stephan Hoyer wrote: > >> I am also concerned about adding more special cases for NumPy scalars vs >> arrays. These cases are already confusing (e.g., making no distinction >> between 0d arrays and s

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Combining covariance and correlation coefficient into one numpy.cov call

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Mathew S. Madhavacheril < mathewsyr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Stephan Hoyer wrote: >> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Mathew S. Madhavacheril >> > wrote: >> >> >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] how to name "contagious" keyword in np.ma.convolve

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:30 PM, wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:25 PM, wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Pierre Haessig >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> Le 16/10/2016 à 11:52, Hanno Klemm a écrit : When I have similar situations, I usually interpolate between the valid val

Re: [Numpy-discussion] how to name "contagious" keyword in np.ma.convolve

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:25 PM, wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Pierre Haessig > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> Le 16/10/2016 à 11:52, Hanno Klemm a écrit : >>> When I have similar situations, I usually interpolate between the valid >>> values. I assume there are a lot of use cases for convo

Re: [Numpy-discussion] how to name "contagious" keyword in np.ma.convolve

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Pierre Haessig wrote: > Hi, > > > Le 16/10/2016 à 11:52, Hanno Klemm a écrit : >> When I have similar situations, I usually interpolate between the valid >> values. I assume there are a lot of use cases for convolutions but I have >> difficulties imagining that i

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

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 9:12 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 integer powers with the `**` operator. > The two alternatives looked to be > > Raise an error for arrays and num

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Which NumPy/Numpy/numpy spelling?

https://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/scipy-user/2010-June/025756.html "NumPy and SciPy to refer to the projects. numpy and scipy to refer to the packages, specifically. When in doubt, use the former." I thought there was also another discussion about capital letters, but I don't find it. Josef On

Re: [Numpy-discussion] StackOverflow documentation

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Pauli Virtanen wrote: > Thu, 21 Jul 2016 16:24:15 +0200, mail kirjoitti: > [clip] >> Since it is run by the community, perhaps it's not a bad idea to >> encourage people to share their examples. > > I would perhaps rather encourage people to improve the "Numpy User

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Added atleast_nd, request for clarification/cleanup of atleast_3d

On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 3:29 AM, wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Ralf Gommers > wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 7:06 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> >> On Jul 5, 2016 9:09 PM, "Joseph Fox-Rabinovitz" >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > I have generalized np.atleast_1d, np

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Added atleast_nd, request for clarification/cleanup of atleast_3d

On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 7:06 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > > On Jul 5, 2016 9:09 PM, "Joseph Fox-Rabinovitz" >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > I have generalized np.atleast_1d, np.atleast_2d, np.atleast_3d with a >> > function np.atleast_n

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy.dtype has the wrong size, try recompiling

On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 4:22 AM, Jaime Fernández del Río < jaime.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > This question on Stack Overflow: > > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/38197086/sklearn-numpy-dtype-has-the-wrong-size-try-recompiling-in-both-pycharm-and-te > > If I remember correctly this has something t

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Picking rows with the first (or last) occurrence of each key

On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Juan Nunez-Iglesias wrote: > On 4 July 2016 at 7:27:47 PM, Skip Montanaro (skip.montan...@gmail.com) > wrote: > > Hashing it probably wouldn't work, too > great a chance for collisions. > > > If the string is ASCII, you can always interpret the bytes as part of an

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

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 4:31 PM, Alan Isaac wrote: > On 6/13/2016 1:54 PM, Marten van Kerkwijk wrote: >> >> 1. What in principle is the best return type for int ** int (which >> Josef I think most properly rephrased as whether `**` should be >> thought of as a float operator, like `/` in python3 a

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

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 12:07 PM, wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:51 AM, wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Antoine Pitrou >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 10:49:44 -0400 >>> josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: >>> > >>> > My argument is that `**` is like integer division a

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

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:51 AM, wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Antoine Pitrou > wrote: > >> On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 10:49:44 -0400 >> josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: >> > >> > My argument is that `**` is like integer division and sqrt where the >> domain >> > where integer return are t

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

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 10:49:44 -0400 > josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > My argument is that `**` is like integer division and sqrt where the > domain > > where integer return are the correct numbers is too small to avoid > > headaches by

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

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Alan Isaac wrote: > On 6/13/2016 4:47 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > >> Currently, the choice is simple: if you want an int output, >> have an int input; if you want a float output, have a float output. >> > > > That is a misunderstanding, which may be influencing t

Re: [Numpy-discussion] scipy.stats.qqplot and scipy.stats.probplot axis labeling

On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Mark Gawron wrote: > Thanks, Jozef. This is very helpful. And I will direct this > to one of the other mailing lists, once I read the previous posts. > > Regarding your remark: Maybe Im having a terminology problem. It seems > to me once you do > > osm = dist.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] scipy.stats.qqplot and scipy.stats.probplot axis labeling

On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > Hi Mark, > > Note that the scipy-dev or scipy-user mailing list would have been more > appropriate for this question. > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Mark Gawron wrote: > >> >> >> The scipy.stats.qqplot and scipy.stats.probplot funct

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

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Jun 10, 2016 10:50, "Alan Isaac" wrote: > > > > On 6/10/2016 1:34 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> > >> You keep pounding on this example. It's a fine example, but, c'mon. **2 > is probably at least 100x more common in real source code.

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

On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 8:41 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 9:16 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > 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

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

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > 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 '**' >>> >>>

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

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-incompatible change that I'm not sure how we could actua

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

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 12:47 PM, wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Charles R Harris > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi

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

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> 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 negat

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Joseph Martinot-Lagarde < joseph.martinot-laga...@m4x.org> wrote: > Le 18/07/2014 22:46, Chris Barker a écrit : > > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Joseph Martinot-Lagarde > > > > wrote: > > > > In addition, > > you

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Charles G. Waldman wrote: > Joseph Martinot-Lagarde writes: > > > Compare what's comparable: > > That's fair. > > > In addition, you have to use AltGr on some keyboards to get the brackets > > Wow, it must be rather painful to do any real programming on such a > k

Re: [Numpy-discussion] `allclose` vs `assert_allclose`

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On 18 Jul 2014 19:31, wrote: > >> > >> > >> > Making the behavior of assert_allclose depending on whether desired is > >> > exactly zero or 1e-20 looks too difficult to remember, and which > desired I > >> > use would depend on what I get

Re: [Numpy-discussion] `allclose` vs `assert_allclose`

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 7:03 PM, wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> > >> For cases like this, you need *some* non-zero atol or the thing just > >> doesn't work, and one could quibble over the ex

Re: [Numpy-discussion] `allclose` vs `assert_allclose`

> > > > Making the behavior of assert_allclose depending on whether desired is > > exactly zero or 1e-20 looks too difficult to remember, and which desired > I > > use would depend on what I get out of R or Stata. > > I thought your whole point here was that 1e-20 and zero are > qualitatively diffe

Re: [Numpy-discussion] `allclose` vs `assert_allclose`

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 2:03 PM, wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:38 PM, wrote: >> > >> > On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:07 PM, wrote: >> > >> >> If you mean by this to add atol=1e-8 as default, then I'm against it. >> >> >> >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] `allclose` vs `assert_allclose`

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:38 PM, wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:07 PM, wrote: > > > >> If you mean by this to add atol=1e-8 as default, then I'm against it. > >> > >> At least it will change the meaning of many of our tests

Re: [Numpy-discussion] `allclose` vs `assert_allclose`

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Ralf Gommers > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Tony Yu wrote: > >> It seems like the defaults for `allclose` and `assert_allclose` should > >> match, and an absolute tolerance of 0 is pr

Re: [Numpy-discussion] `allclose` vs `assert_allclose`

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:07 PM, wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On 16 Jul 2014 10:26, "Tony Yu" wrote: >> > >> > Is there any reason why the defaults for `allclose` and >> `assert_allclose` differ? This makes debugging a broken test much more >> diff

[Numpy-discussion] problems with mailing list ?

Are the problems with sending out the messages with the mailing lists? I'm getting some replies without original messages, and in some threads I don't get replies, missing part of the discussions. Josef ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussio

Re: [Numpy-discussion] `allclose` vs `assert_allclose`

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:07 PM, wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On 16 Jul 2014 10:26, "Tony Yu" wrote: >> > >> > Is there any reason why the defaults for `allclose` and >> `assert_allclose` differ? This makes debugging a broken test much more >> diff

Re: [Numpy-discussion] `allclose` vs `assert_allclose`

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On 16 Jul 2014 10:26, "Tony Yu" wrote: > > > > Is there any reason why the defaults for `allclose` and > `assert_allclose` differ? This makes debugging a broken test much more > difficult. More importantly, using an absolute tolerance of

Re: [Numpy-discussion] `allclose` vs `assert_allclose`

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:21 PM, wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:07 PM, wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> >>> On 16 Jul 2014 10:26, "Tony Yu" wrote: >>> > >>> > Is there any reason why the defaults for `allclose` and >>> `assert_allclose`

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Sebastian Berg > wrote: > > On Mo, 2014-07-07 at 09:50 -0400, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Sebastian Berg > >> wrote: > >> On Mo, 2014-07-07 at 08:25 -0400,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Sebastian Berg wrote: > On Mo, 2014-07-07 at 08:25 -0400, Alan G Isaac wrote: > > On 7/7/2014 7:17 AM, Daπid wrote: > > > How about a new one? np.matarray, for MATLAB array. > > > > > > How about `str2arr` or even `build`, since teaching appears to be a > focus. >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy.random selection from a loglogistic distribution?

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Liz VanWormer wrote: > Dear all, > > I'm a novice Python user, and I need to draw random variables from a > loglogistic distribution. I've used the numpy.random command in the past to > select variables from supported distributions (beta, normal, lognormal, > etc).

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Switch to using ATLAS for OSX binary wheels

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 10:51 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Matthew Brett >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Friday, June 13, 2014, Ralf Gommers wrote: On Fri, Jun 13, 2014

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.9.0 beta release

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:10 PM, wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 8:49 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:23 PM, Charles R Harris >>> wrote: On Mon, Jun 9, 201

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: NumPy 1.9.0 beta release

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 8:49 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:23 PM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Jeff Reback wrote: The one pandas tes

Re: [Numpy-discussion] big-bangs versus incremental improvements (was: Re: SciPy 2014 BoF NumPy Participation)

On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:40 AM, David Cournapeau wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 3:36 AM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Travis Oliphant >> wrote: >> >>> Believe me, I'm all for incremental changes if it is actually poss

Re: [Numpy-discussion] big-bangs versus incremental improvements (was: Re: SciPy 2014 BoF NumPy Participation)

On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Todd wrote: > > On 5 Jun 2014 14:28, "David Cournapeau" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Todd wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 5 Jun 2014 02:57, "Nathaniel Smith" wrote: > >> > > >> > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:18 AM, Travis Oliphant > wrote: >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ANN: Pandas 0.14.0 released

No comment, Josef On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Neal Becker wrote: > pip install --user --up pandas > Downloading/unpacking pandas from > https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/p/pandas/pandas-0.14.0.tar.gz#md5=b775987c0ceebcc8d5ace4a1241c967a > ... > > Downloading/unpacking numpy>=1.6.1 fro

Re: [Numpy-discussion] smoothing function

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 1:04 PM, rodrigo koblitz > wrote: > > Buenos, > > I'm reading Zuur book (ecology models with R) and try make it entire in > > python. > > Have this function in R: > > M4 <- gam(So ∼ s(De) + factor(ID), subset = I1

Re: [Numpy-discussion] smoothing function

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 8:04 AM, rodrigo koblitz wrote: > Buenos, > I'm reading Zuur book (ecology models with R) and try make it entire in > python. > Have this function in R: > M4 <- gam(So ∼ s(De) + factor(ID), subset = I1) > > the 's' term indicated with So is modelled as a smoothing function

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 64-bit windows numpy / scipy wheels for testing

On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Carl Kleffner wrote: > A possible option is to install the toolchain inside site-packages and to > deploy it as PYPI wheel or wininst packages. The PATH to the toolchain > could be extended during import of the package. But I have no idea, whats > the best strateg

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Slightly off-topic - accuracy of C exp function?

On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 8:31 PM, wrote: > > > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 8:05 PM, wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Matthew Brett >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Matthew Brett >>> wrote: >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Na

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Slightly off-topic - accuracy of C exp function?

On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 8:05 PM, wrote: > > > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Matthew Brett >> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:22 AM, Matthe

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Slightly off-topic - accuracy of C exp function?

On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Matthew Brett > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 6:22 AM, Matthew Brett > wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I'm exploring Mingw

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.9.x branch

On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Sebastian Berg wrote: > On Mi, 2014-04-23 at 10:11 -0400, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 5:32 AM, Sebastian Berg > > wrote: > > > On Di, 2014-04-22 at 15:35 -0600, Charles R Harris wrote: > > >> Hi All, > > >> > > >> > > >> I'd like to bra

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 64-bit windows numpy / scipy wheels for testing

On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 10:20 AM, wrote: > > > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 10:10 AM, wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Matthew Brett >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:26 PM, wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:29 PM, wrote: >>> >> >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 64-bit windows numpy / scipy wheels for testing

On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 10:10 AM, wrote: > > > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Matthew Brett wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:26 PM, wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:29 PM, wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Charles R Har

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 64-bit windows numpy / scipy wheels for testing

On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:26 PM, wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:29 PM, wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Charles R Harris > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Apr 24, 2

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 64-bit windows numpy / scipy wheels for testing

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > Hi Matthew, > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Thanks to Cark Kleffner's toolchain and some help from Clint Whaley >> (main author of ATLAS), I've built 64-bit windows numpy and scipy >> wheels for

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 64-bit windows numpy / scipy wheels for testing

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:29 PM, wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:08 PM, wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Charles R Harris < >>> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrot

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 64-bit windows numpy / scipy wheels for testing

> > > OT: Oh, I hate pip and packages that require numpy E:\tmp>C:\Python27\python C:\Python27\Scripts\pip-script.py install -U patsy Downloading/unpacking patsy Running setup.py (path:c:\users\josef\appdata\local\temp\pip_build_josef\patsy\setup.py) egg_info for package patsy no previous

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 64-bit windows numpy / scipy wheels for testing

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:08 PM, wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Charles R Harris < >> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi Matthew, >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Matthew Brett >>> wrote

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 64-bit windows numpy / scipy wheels for testing

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:08 PM, wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Hi Matthew, >> >> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Matthew Brett >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Thanks to Cark Kleffner's toolchain and some help from Cli

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 64-bit windows numpy / scipy wheels for testing

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > Hi Matthew, > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Thanks to Cark Kleffner's toolchain and some help from Clint Whaley >> (main author of ATLAS), I've built 64-bit windows numpy and scipy >> wheels for

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.9.x branch

On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 5:32 AM, Sebastian Berg wrote: > On Di, 2014-04-22 at 15:35 -0600, Charles R Harris wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> >> I'd like to branch 1.9.x at the end of the month. There are a couple >> of reasons for the timing. First, we have a lot of new stuff in the >> development branch.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] PEP 465 has been accepted / volunteers needed

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 4:43 AM, Francesc Alted wrote: > On 4/9/14, 10:46 PM, Chris Barker wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Nathaniel Smith > > wrote: >> >> Thank you! Though I suspect that the most important part of my >> contribution may have just been my

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Where to put versionadded

On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:33 PM, wrote: > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:48 PM, wrote: On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Where to put versionadded

On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Charles R Harris > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:48 PM, wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Charles R Harris >>> wrote: >>> > Hi All, >>> > >>> > Currently there are several

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Where to put versionadded

On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > Hi All, > > Currently there are several placements of the '.. versionadded::' directive > and I'd like to settle > on a proper style for consistency. There are two occasions on which it is > used, first, when a new function or class is adde

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Standard Deviation (std): Suggested change for "ddof" default value

On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Daπid wrote: > > On 2 April 2014 16:06, Sturla Molden wrote: >> >> wrote: >> >> > pandas came later and thought ddof=1 is worth more than consistency. >> >> Pandas is a data analysis package. NumPy is a numerical array package. >> >> I think ddof=1 is justified fo

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Standard Deviation (std): Suggested change for "ddof" default value

On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Bago wrote: > > > >> >> Sturla >> >> P.S. Personally I am not convinced "unbiased" is ever a valid argument, as >> the biased estimator has smaller error. This is from experience in >> marksmanship: I'd rather shoot a tight series with small systematic error >> than

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Standard Deviation (std): Suggested change for "ddof" default value

On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Sturla Molden wrote: > wrote: > >> pandas came later and thought ddof=1 is worth more than consistency. > > Pandas is a data analysis package. NumPy is a numerical array package. > > I think ddof=1 is justified for Pandas, for consistency with statistical > softwa

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Standard Deviation (std): Suggested change for "ddof" default value

On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 9:51 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:08 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Sturla Molden >>> wrote: >>> > Haslwanter Thomas wrote: >>> > >>> >> Personal

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Changes to np.vander

On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:31 AM, wrote: > On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Jaime Fernández del Río > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have submitted a PR (https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/4568) that speeds >> up `np.vander` by using accumulated multiplication instead of exponentiation >> to compute the

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Changes to np.vander

On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Jaime Fernández del Río wrote: > Hi, > > I have submitted a PR (https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/4568) that speeds > up `np.vander` by using accumulated multiplication instead of exponentiation > to compute the Vandermonde matrix. For largish matrices the speed

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Default builds of OpenBLAS development branch are now fork safe

On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Olivier Grisel wrote: > 2014-03-27 14:55 GMT+01:00 : >> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Olivier Grisel >> wrote: >>> My understanding of Carl's effort is that the long term goal is to >>> have official windows whl packages for both numpy and scipy published >>>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Default builds of OpenBLAS development branch are now fork safe

On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Olivier Grisel wrote: > My understanding of Carl's effort is that the long term goal is to > have official windows whl packages for both numpy and scipy published > on PyPI with a builtin BLAS / LAPACK implementation so that users can > do `pip install scipy` under

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Resolving the associativity/precedence debate for @

On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 11:58 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >>> > After 88 emails we don't have a conclusion in th

Re: [Numpy-discussion] why sort does not accept a key?

On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Alan G Isaac wrote: >>> I'm wondering if `sort` intentionally does not accept >>> a `key` >>> or if this is just a missing feature? > > > On 3/24/2014 11:47 AM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: >> It

Re: [Numpy-discussion] unique return_index order?

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:27 PM, wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 6:49 PM, wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Charles R Harris < >>> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrot

Re: [Numpy-discussion] unique return_index order?

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 6:49 PM, wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Charles R Harris < >> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote: >>> The doc

Re: [Numpy-discussion] unique return_index order?

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote: > >> The documentation of numpy.unique >> http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/generated/numpy.unique.html >> does not seem to promise that return_index=True will always inde

Re: [Numpy-discussion] unique return_index order?

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:26 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote: > The documentation of numpy.unique > http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/generated/numpy.unique.html > does not seem to promise that return_index=True will always index the > *first* occurrence of each unique item, which I believe is the

Re: [Numpy-discussion] [help needed] associativity and precedence of '@'

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> Okay, I wrote a little script [1] to scan Python source files look for >> things like 'dot(a, dot(b, c))' or 'dot(dot(a, b), c)', or the ndarray.dot >> method equivalents. So wh

Re: [Numpy-discussion] [help needed] associativity and precedence of '@'

On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Robert Kern > wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >>> Mathematica: instead of having an associativity, a @ b

Re: [Numpy-discussion] [help needed] associativity and precedence of '@'

I'm still bothered by what Nathaniel mentioned about mixing 1d and 2d arrays >>> c = np.arange(4) >>> a = np.arange(16).reshape(4,4) >>> cc = c[:,None] >>> a.dot(c).dot(c.T) 420 >>> a.dot(c.dot(c.T)) array([[ 0, 14, 28, 42], [ 56, 70, 84, 98], [112, 126, 140, 154], [

Re: [Numpy-discussion] [help needed] associativity and precedence of '@'

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Christophe Bal wrote: > I think that weak-left is a little strange, just think a little of the > operators used by mathematicians that always follow a hierarchy. > > A parser is mostly done using grammars : see > http://docs.python.org/3.1/reference/grammar.html.

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >