Re: [Numpy-discussion] GSoC project: draft of proposal
Because of the license problem, I think I will choose Yeppp as a default backend. And if time allows, maybe I can implement other bindings. (Vc library) Also I found that sleef library is in public domain. But it seems that it only provides fast math function, not vectorized math function. So I am not sure if it can be used in this project. Finally, if there are any suggestions for my proposal, please point out. I will appreciate your suggestions. Thanks. Regards, Leo Mao ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] GSoC project: draft of proposal
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 1:43 AM, alex argri...@ncsu.edu wrote: I think everyone who wants fast numpy linalg already connects to something like OpenBLAS or MKL. When these are not available, numpy uses its own lapack-lite which is way slower. I don't think you are going to beat OpenBLAS, so are you suggesting to speed up the slow default lapack-lite, or are you proposing something else? I think most CPUs nowadays support instructions like SSE2, AVX etc, so maybe numpy can use OpenBLAS (or somethine else) by default ? ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] GSoC project: draft of proposal
Hi everyone, Thanks for your relies! I think Gregor's uvml package is really a good starting point for me. I think the actual choice of the library could be made a configurable option. Sounds like a good idea? If the implementations are very similar, maybe I can implement multiple libraries bindings? A potential issue is that some libraries may lack some functions. For example, Yeppp is a good candidates as long as it provides pre-build libraries on many platforms and its API is pretty clear. But Yeppp lacks some functions like inverse trigonometric functions. Intels VML provides much more functions but sadly it is not free. I found another library called Vc, which looks like a potential candidates for this project: http://code.compeng.uni-frankfurt.de/projects/vc I haven't digged into it yet so I'm not sure if it provides what we want. supporting a library that is bsd 3 clauses could help to higly reduce the compilation problem like what we have with blas. Yeppp is bsd 3 clauses so I think Yeppp is really a good choice. Is there a list of licenses which can be added into numpy without pain? (how about LGPL3 ?) Regards, Leo Mao On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Frédéric Bastien no...@nouiz.org wrote: Just a comment, supporting a library that is bsd 3 clauses could help to higly reduce the compilation problem like what we have with blas. We could just include it in numpy/download it automatically or whatever to make the install trivial and then we could suppose all users have it. Deadling with blas is already not fun, if new dependency could be trivial to link to, it would be great. Fred On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Gregor Thalhammer gregor.thalham...@gmail.com wrote: Am 14.03.2014 um 11:00 schrieb Eric Moore e...@redtetrahedron.org: On Friday, March 14, 2014, Gregor Thalhammer gregor.thalham...@gmail.com wrote: Am 13.03.2014 um 18:35 schrieb Leo Mao lmao20...@gmail.com: Hi, Thanks a lot for your advice, Chuck. Following your advice, I have modified my draft of proposal. (attachment) I think it still needs more comments so that I can make it better. And I found that maybe I can also make some functions related to linalg (like dot, svd or something else) faster by integrating a proper library into numpy. Regards, Leo Mao Dear Leo, large parts of your proposal are covered by the uvml package https://github.com/geggo/uvml In my opinion you should also consider Intels VML (part of MKL) as a candidate. (Yes I know, it is not free). To my best knowledge it provides many more vectorized functions than the open source alternatives. Concerning your time table, once you implemented support for one function, adding more functions is very easy. Gregor I'm not sure that your week old project is enough to discourage this gsoc project. In particular, it would be nice to be able to ship this directly as part of numpy and that won't really be possible with mlk. Eric Hi, it's not at all my intention to discourage this project. I hope Leo Mao can use the uvml package as a starting point for further improvements. Since most vectorized math libraries share a very similar interface, I think the actual choice of the library could be made a configurable option. Adapting uvml to use e.g. yeppp instead of MKL should be straightforward. Similar to numpy or scipy built with MKL lapack and distributed by enthought or Christoph Gohlke, using MKL should not be ruled out completely. Gregor ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] GSoC project: draft of proposal
Hi, Thanks a lot for your advice, Chuck. Following your advice, I have modified my draft of proposal. (attachment) I think it still needs more comments so that I can make it better. And I found that maybe I can also make some functions related to linalg (like dot, svd or something else) faster by integrating a proper library into numpy. Regards, Leo Mao On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Leo Mao lmao20...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Aron, Previously mentioned by Julian, Yeppp may be a good candidate. As for selecting a good library, I will consider the performance and the API of the library. The integration of the library should improve the performance of numpy and also not make the source too complicated to maintain. And I think the library should be mature so that the API will not be changed significantly. Please point out if there is something I miss. Also I will be grateful to any suggestions for my proposal. Regards, Leo Mao On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Aron Ahmadia a...@ahmadia.net wrote: Hi Leo, Out of curiosity, which vector math libraries did you have in mind as likely candidates for inclusion? How are you planning on selecting the library to integrate? Cheers, Aron On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Leo Mao lmao20...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The attachment is my draft of proposal. The project is vector math library integration. I think I need some feedback to make it solider. Any comment will be appreciated. Thanks in advance. Regards, Leo Mao The proposal as it stands is too open ended and lacking in specifics. Probably you should select a library before the start of GSOC, or at least have a list of candidates, and also narrow the part of numpy you want to improve to something definite: linalg, special functions, etc. That doesn't mean you can't do more if time allows ;) An estimate of expected gains over current code would also help. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion text/html; charset=US-ASCII; name="proposal.html": Unrecognized ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
[Numpy-discussion] GSoC project: draft of proposal
Hi, The attachment is my draft of proposal. The project is vector math library integration. I think I need some feedback to make it solider. Any comment will be appreciated. Thanks in advance. Regards, Leo Mao text/html; charset=US-ASCII; name="proposal.html": Unrecognized ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] GSoC project: draft of proposal
Hi Aron, Previously mentioned by Julian, Yeppp may be a good candidate. As for selecting a good library, I will consider the performance and the API of the library. The integration of the library should improve the performance of numpy and also not make the source too complicated to maintain. And I think the library should be mature so that the API will not be changed significantly. Please point out if there is something I miss. Also I will be grateful to any suggestions for my proposal. Regards, Leo Mao On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Aron Ahmadia a...@ahmadia.net wrote: Hi Leo, Out of curiosity, which vector math libraries did you have in mind as likely candidates for inclusion? How are you planning on selecting the library to integrate? Cheers, Aron On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Leo Mao lmao20...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The attachment is my draft of proposal. The project is vector math library integration. I think I need some feedback to make it solider. Any comment will be appreciated. Thanks in advance. Regards, Leo Mao ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] GSoC 2014 NumPy
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 5:42 AM, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@gmail.com wrote: It's possible to come up with an interesting proposal in this area I think. An issue may be that the FFT code in numpy and scipy isn't very actively worked on at the moment, so finding a suitable mentor could be tricky. So should I choose another topic? Actually, I just read the thread numpy gsoc topic idea and I found that the idea vector math library integration really interests me! And I have a qeustion: how can I find a suitable mentor? Currently I'm digging into the source of numpy and trying to make a small pull request. Also I keep thinking how to write a proper proposal. Are these enough? Can I do more for now? I will be grateful for any advice. Thanks in advance. Regards, Leo Mao ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
[Numpy-discussion] GSoC 2014 NumPy
Hello, I'm a student studying electrical engineering. I am interested in contributing to NumPy and applying GSoC 2014. I have experience of python and C/C++ programming, and I have already seen https://github.com/scipy/scipy/wiki/GSoC-project-ideas. But on that page only the project Improve Numpy datetime functionality targets NumPy. Currently I am trying to come up with some ideas about enhancing NumPy. I will be grateful if someone could give me some ideas or guide me as how to do next. BTW, I am looking into the issue list of NumPy on github and trying to make some small bugfixes/enhancement for NumPy. Thanks in advance. Regards: Leo Mao, student in National Taiwan University, Email: lmao20...@gmail.com ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] GSoC 2014 NumPy
Hello Ray, Thanks for your suggestion! I just read the links you provided and I think I can implement it as long as I do further research on zoom fft algorithm. So I wonder if this can be a GSoC project? Maybe I should extend this idea or combine it with other ideas? BTW, just for curiosity, why we need both scipy.linalg and numpy.linalg? Is implementing all functions in numpy a bad idea? Regards, Leo Mao ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
