On 14-Feb-15 11:35 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Ryan Nelson rnelsonc...@gmail.com wrote:
Colin,
I currently use Py3.4 and Numpy 1.9.1. However, I built a quick test conda
environment with Python2.7 and Numpy 1.7.0, and I get the same:
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:05 PM, cjw c...@ncf.ca wrote:
On 14-Feb-15 11:35 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Ryan Nelson rnelsonc...@gmail.com
wrote:
Colin,
I currently use Py3.4 and Numpy 1.9.1. However, I built a quick test
conda
environment with
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:36 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:05 PM, cjw c...@ncf.ca wrote:
On 14-Feb-15 11:35 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Ryan Nelson rnelsonc...@gmail.com
wrote:
Colin,
I currently use Py3.4 and
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:36 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:05 PM, cjw c...@ncf.ca wrote:
On 14-Feb-15 11:35 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 4:18 PM,
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 5:21 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:36 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:05 PM, cjw c...@ncf.ca wrote:
On 14-Feb-15
Thanks Ryan.
There are a number of good thoughts in your message. I'll try to keep
track of them.
Another respondent reported different results than mine. I'm in the
process of re-installing to check.
Colin W.
On 11 February 2015 at 16:18, Ryan Nelson rnelsonc...@gmail.com wrote:
Colin,
On 11-Feb-15 10:47 AM, Sebastian Berg
wrote:
On Di, 2015-02-10 at 15:07 -0700, cjw wrote:
It seems to be agreed that there are weaknesses in the existing Numpy Matrix
Class.
Some problems are illustrated below.
Not to delve
Just recalling the one-year-ago discussion:
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/56494
Alan Isaac
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
On Mi, 2015-02-11 at 11:38 -0500, cjw wrote:
On 11-Feb-15 10:47 AM, Sebastian Berg wrote:
On Di, 2015-02-10 at 15:07 -0700, cjw wrote:
It seems to be agreed that there are weaknesses in the existing Numpy
Matrix
Class.
Some problems are illustrated below.
Not to delve
On 11-Feb-15 10:21 AM, Ryan Nelson
wrote:
So:
In [2]: np.mat([4,'5',6])
Out[2]:
matrix([['4', '5', '6']], dtype='U11')
In [3]: np.mat([4,'5',6], dtype=int)
Out[3]: matrix([[4, 5, 6]])
Thanks Ryan,
We are not singing from the same hymn
On 11-Feb-15 12:13 PM, Alan G Isaac
wrote:
Just recalling the one-year-ago discussion:
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/56494
Alan Isaac
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
Thanks Sebastian,
This would appear to make a case for considering not having Matrix
as a sub-class of an np array.
On the other hand, so much work has gone into np, and there is some
commonality between the needs of Matrix and Array.
Colin W.
So:
In [2]: np.mat([4,'5',6])
Out[2]:
matrix([['4', '5', '6']], dtype='U11')
In [3]: np.mat([4,'5',6], dtype=int)
Out[3]: matrix([[4, 5, 6]])
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 5:07 PM, cjw c...@ncf.ca wrote:
It seems to be agreed that there are weaknesses in the existing Numpy
Matrix
Class.
Some
On Di, 2015-02-10 at 15:07 -0700, cjw wrote:
It seems to be agreed that there are weaknesses in the existing Numpy Matrix
Class.
Some problems are illustrated below.
Not to delve deeply into a discussion, but unfortunately, there seem far
more fundamental problems because of the always 2-D
On 2/11/2015 2:25 PM, cjw wrote:
I think of the matrix as a numeric object. What would the case be for having
a Boolean matrix?
It's one of my primary uses:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjacency_matrix
Numpy alread provides SVD:
11.02.2015, 21:57, Alan G Isaac kirjoitti:
[clip]
I think gains could be in lazy evaluation structures (e.g.,
a KroneckerProduct object that never actually produces the product
unless forced to.)
This sounds like an abstract linear operator interface. Several attempts
have been made to this
Colin,
I currently use Py3.4 and Numpy 1.9.1. However, I built a quick test conda
environment with Python2.7 and Numpy 1.7.0, and I get the same:
Python 2.7.9 |Continuum Analytics, Inc.| (default, Dec 18 2014, 16:57:52)
[MSC v
.1500 64 bit (AMD64)]
Type copyright, credits or license
It seems to be agreed that there are weaknesses in the existing Numpy Matrix
Class.
Some problems are illustrated below.
I'll try to put some suggestions over the coming weeks and would appreciate
comments.
Colin W.
Test Script:
if __name__ == '__main__':
a= mat([4, 5, 6])
On Apr 24, 2008, at 8:52 PM, Bill Spotz wrote:
On Apr 24, 2008, at 5:45 PM, Timothy Hochberg wrote:
Bill Spotz wrote:
I have generally thought about this in the context of, say, a
Krylov-space iterative method, and what that type of interface
would
lead to the most readable code.
Can
Chris.Barker wrote:
Alan G Isaac wrote:
the cost of complexity should be justified by a gain in functionality.
I don't think functionality is the right word here. the Matrix class(es)
is all about clean, convenient API, i.e. style, not functionality -- we
have all the functionality
On Apr 24, 2008, at 5:45 PM, Timothy Hochberg wrote:
Bill Spotz wrote:
I have generally thought about this in the context of, say, a
Krylov-space iterative method, and what that type of interface would
lead to the most readable code.
Can you whip up a small example, starting with the
21 matches
Mail list logo
