On Aug 28, 2009, at 12:39 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Travis Oliphant <oliph...@enthought.com
> wrote:
Hello folks,
In keeping with the complaint that the pace of NumPy development is
too fast, I've finished the merge of the datetime branch to the
core. The trunk builds and all the (previous) tests pass for me.
There are several tasks remaining to be done (the current status is
definitely still alpha):
* write many unit tests for the desired behavior (especially for
the many different kinds of dates supported)
* finish coercion between datetimes and timedeltas with different
frequencies
* improve the ufuncs that support datetime and timedelta so that
they look at the frequency information.
* improve the way datetime arrays print
* probably several other things that I haven't listed
Because of the last point, I will spend my next effort on the work
updating the proposal to more clearly define some of the expected
behaviors and write documentation about the expected behavior of the
new features.
Help, reviews, criticisms, suggestions, fixes, and patches, are most
welcome.
Umm, replacing the previous code 'M' by '.' in generate_umath is a
bit obscure. Isn't there a better choice than '.' ?
Please make the multiline comments conform to the standard. I spend
a lot of time fixing these up... And you broke some I already fixed.
Sorry about that. Can you remind me what the standard is?
Thanks,
-Travis
--
Travis Oliphant
Enthought Inc.
1-512-536-1057
http://www.enthought.com
oliph...@enthought.com
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
