Matthew Brett wrote:
Hi,
The feature of compiling code for multiple types is somewhat orthogonal
to
ndarray support; better treat them seperately and take one at the time.
Well, it's relevant to numpy because if you want to implement - for
example - a numpy sort, then you've got to deal
Dag wrote:
General feedback is welcome; in particular, I need more opinions about
what syntax people would like. We seem unable to find something that we
really like; this is the current best candidate (cdef is the way you
declare types on variables in Cython):
cdef int i = 4, j = 6
cdef
Hi Dag,
General feedback is welcome; in particular, I need more opinions about
what syntax people would like. We seem unable to find something that
we
really like; this is the current best candidate (cdef is the way you
declare types on variables in Cython):
cdef int i = 4, j = 6
cdef
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 08:59:25AM +0200, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
The negative indices thing is potentially confusing to new users. Pex uses
a different syntax (arr{i, j} for efficient array lookups) partly to make
this fact very explicit. Thoughts?
I don't like the different syntax. I
Hi,
Thanks a lot for the email - it's an exciting project.
cdef int i = 4, j = 6
cdef np.ndarray[np.float64, 2] arr = np.zeros((10, 10), dtype=np.float64)
arr[i, j] = 1
I'm afraid I'm going to pitch into an area I'm ignorant of, and I'm
sorry for that, but do you think there is any way of
Matthew Brett wrote:
Hi,
Thanks a lot for the email - it's an exciting project.
cdef int i = 4, j = 6
cdef np.ndarray[np.float64, 2] arr = np.zeros((10, 10),
dtype=np.float64)
arr[i, j] = 1
I'm afraid I'm going to pitch into an area I'm ignorant of, and I'm
sorry for that, but do you
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since there's been a lot of Cython discussion lately I thought I'd speak
up and start a thread specifically for my project.
Thanks for coming over for the discussion!
The code above the under the hood acquires a
Joris De Ridder wrote:
Hi Dag,
General feedback is welcome; in particular, I need more opinions about
what syntax people would like. We seem unable to find something that
we
really like; this is the current best candidate (cdef is the way you
declare types on variables in Cython):
cdef
Fernando Perez wrote:
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since there's been a lot of Cython discussion lately I thought I'd speak
up and start a thread specifically for my project.
Thanks for coming over for the discussion!
The code above the
Hi Dag
2008/6/21 Dag Sverre Seljebotn [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
However, I could make it so that if you left out the type, it would be
auto-detected. I.e.:
cdef np.ndarray[2] arr = ...
cdef np.float64 x = arr[3,4]
Would it not be possible for Cython to make the necessary C-API calls
to query the
2008/6/21 Dag Sverre Seljebotn [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Dag wrote:
General feedback is welcome; in particular, I need more opinions about
what syntax people would like. We seem unable to find something that we
really like; this is the current best candidate (cdef is the way you
declare types on
Anne Archibald wrote:
2008/6/21 Dag Sverre Seljebotn [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Dag wrote:
General feedback is welcome; in particular, I need more opinions about
what syntax people would like. We seem unable to find something that we
really like; this is the current best candidate (cdef is the way
I am very worried about the negative numbers issue. It's the sort of
thing that will readily lead to errors, and that produces a
significant difference between cython and python. I understand the
performance issues that motivate it, but cython really needs to be
easy to use or we might as
Hi,
The feature of compiling code for multiple types is somewhat orthogonal to
ndarray support; better treat them seperately and take one at the time.
Well, it's relevant to numpy because if you want to implement - for
example - a numpy sort, then you've got to deal with an unspecified
number
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 17:08, Anne Archibald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My suggestion is this: allow negative indices, accepting the cost in
tight loops. (If bounds checking is enabled, the cost will be
negligible anyway.) Provide a #pragma allowing the user to assert that
a certain piece of
2008/6/21 Robert Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 17:08, Anne Archibald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My suggestion is this: allow negative indices, accepting the cost in
tight loops. (If bounds checking is enabled, the cost will be
negligible anyway.) Provide a #pragma allowing the
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 18:45, Anne Archibald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/6/21 Robert Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 17:08, Anne Archibald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My suggestion is this: allow negative indices, accepting the cost in
tight loops. (If bounds checking is
17 matches
Mail list logo
