This should be fixed with https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/6462
kl. 07:39:05 UTC+2 tirsdag 8. april 2014 skrev Ivar Nesje følgende:
Thanks for the report.
I found the bug in
https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/master/base/statistics.jl#L470,
because it tries to calculate
Thanks again!
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 2:00:50 AM UTC-4, Ivar Nesje wrote:
This should be fixed with https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/6462
kl. 07:39:05 UTC+2 tirsdag 8. april 2014 skrev Ivar Nesje følgende:
Thanks for the report.
I found the bug in
I don't think it is a good idea to default to the pivoting version even
though it allows the matrix to be positive semidefinite. The pivoting would
surprise most user. I don't know your use case but would sqrtm be a
possibility instead of chol?
2014-04-08 4:38 GMT+02:00 Jiahao Chen
Hello Iain, I don't understand what you mean :
*julia versioninfo()*
*Julia Version 0.2.0*
*Commit 05c6461 (2013-11-16 23:44 UTC)*
*Platform Info:*
* System: Windows (x86_64-w64-mingw32)*
* WORD_SIZE: *
*julia *
*64*
*julia *
* BLAS: libopenblas (USE64BITINT DYNAMIC_ARCH
This does the trick:
while true
# ...
condition || break
end
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 5:26:00 AM UTC+2, Freddy Chua wrote:
as stated in question..
Unfortunately, from insepcting GLPK source code it seems that whether to
use GNU MP or GLPK bignum is decided at compile time. So it appears that
the Windows binaries which are automatically downloaded by the Julia
package are just not compiled with GNU MP. As far as I can tell, the
options
You can also use a hack to make the matrix positive definite:
mineig = minimum(eigvals(M))
M -= mineig * eye(M)
(And in case you're working on max-cut you can also use
M = (M - mineig * eye(M)) / (1-mineig)
so that the linear constraints in the semidefinite program are still
Hi all,
has anyone implemented an SSA algorithm in julia or wrapped a library for
it? I could not find anything in the available packages and wanted to make
sure I didn't miss it. If not I will stick to R for this . See here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_spectrum_analysis for a
From perusing the Wikipedia page, this technique looks straightforward to
implement using the linear algebra tools available. It seems like having a good
SVD implementation is the main difficulty – which we do. Perhaps there are
subtleties which aren't captured there but I suspect an R or
Jiahao: interesting link! Do you think we should put the meaning of that
error code somewhere? Maybe best would be as the actual message of the
PosDefException.
Andreas: if we un-pivot the result then the user would be unaware, correct?
I feel like chol() is the casual way of doing it and
Thanks Jason, that helps a lot. Also for the pointer to the reverse mode AD.
And you are quite right, number types in Julia is fun and a good learning step
in my case. As were your suggestions and looking at the different approach
taken by PowerSeries and TaylorSeries as far as type
It would be helpful if the LAPACK codes were written out in the Julia
exception, but it is not most exciting thing to write. The un-pivoted
Cholesky factor is not triangular, so I think returning that would also
cause some confusion.
2014-04-08 16:50 GMT+02:00 Iain Dunning iaindunn...@gmail.com:
Hi Rob,
Please do submit your package to METADATA now that it has a well-defined
license. It seems like a really useful tool to have available.
-- John
On Apr 6, 2014, at 4:21 PM, Robert J Goedman goed...@icloud.com wrote:
Hi John,
Jeff has updated his source files with the MIT license
Thanks for the info. I've trying to come up with a type scheme. Say I
create some modulated symbols, then interpolate them with a nyquist filter,
then upsample and shift the signal with a mixer. It would be nice to know
the relative sample rate and center frequency of the signal, plus mod type.
Is it possible to default to unpivoted and if that fails detect that a
pivoted Cholesky might have worked and include a recommendation to try the
pivoted version in the error message?
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Andreas Noack Jensen
andreasnoackjen...@gmail.com wrote:
It would be helpful
Although not too frequent, this would be a good FAQ entry.
Cheers, Kevin
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014, Pierre-Yves Gérardy pyg...@gmail.com wrote:
This does the trick:
while true
# ...
condition || break
end
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 5:26:00 AM UTC+2, Freddy Chua wrote:
as
Happy to hear I didn't just point out a bunch of correctly working code
that I didn't understand. Take care.
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 2:36:23 AM UTC-4, Ivar Nesje wrote:
I was also confused by sub(H(H, :, j), so I just removed it.
kl. 08:12:04 UTC+2 tirsdag 8. april 2014 skrev Stephen
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 5:43:05 AM UTC+3, Jay Kickliter wrote:
You're absolutely right tagging, but have no intention of turning Radio
into a streaming processing framework. My inspiration is
LiquidDSPhttp://liquidsdr.organd Matlab's communications toolbox. If
liquid wasn't GPL, I
If while true loops are idiomatic, could we perhaps make the true optional?
On Tuesday, 8 April 2014 18:57:53 UTC+1, Stefan Karpinski wrote:
Good idea. For what it's worth, these days I would be perfectly happy to
only program with while true loops and explicit breaks.
On Apr 8, 2014, at
On Monday, April 7, 2014 8:51:20 PM UTC-7, Stefan Karpinski wrote:
A couple of examples of informal protocols that are used all the time in
Julia and allow user defined types to easily hook into predefined generic
behaviors are the start/done/next protocol for iteration and the order and
This is what I was looking for; so if I understand you correctly, you
satisfy protocols by extending/monkey-patching Base. This seems
reasonable, but what do you do when you want to define your own protocol
(e.g. Classifier), and Base doesn't have the functions you'd like to
require (e.g.
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Mason McGill mason.b.mcg...@gmail.comwrote:
This is what I was looking for; so if I understand you correctly, you
satisfy protocols by extending/monkey-patching Base.
An important distinction between this and monkey-patching is that if you
create a new type
Eh, doesn't seem that hard to write `while true` and `while` by itself is
kind of confusing. I also don't necessarily think this is how everyone
should write loops, but I increasingly find myself starting out by writing
`while true` and then putting conditions where they are needed as I go.
Then
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 1:17:06 PM UTC-7, Isaiah wrote:
This is what I was looking for; so if I understand you correctly, you
satisfy protocols by extending/monkey-patching Base. This seems
reasonable, but what do you do when you want to define your own protocol
(e.g. Classifier), and
No problem – glad we could clear up the confusion. Generic functions take a
little getting used to, but once you do, they're extremely powerful and
quite intuitive.
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Mason McGill mason.b.mcg...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 1:17:06 PM UTC-7, Isaiah
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 1:23:57 PM UTC-7, Stefan Karpinski wrote:
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Mason McGill
mason.b...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
After all this is sorted out, I'd be happy to distill this into a
subsection for the Julia Types documentation about conventions for
Already done and tested. Works great. Thanks for making that happen to
quickly, Ivar.
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 2:15:57 PM UTC-4, Ivar Nesje wrote:
Now the fix has been merged, so now you just have to pull and make to get
a working version (or wait for the next nightly release).
Ivar
The documentation is a bit different for the 'latest' version of julia, as
compared to version 0.2. I have a few questions/remarks about it.
In the main page http://docs.julialang.org/en/latest/ of the latest
version, I don't see the entry available packages. Or did I miss
something?
I can
It may not address the cross-module aspect well. We didn't have modules
when I write it originally, so any documentation of that interaction would
necessarily be tacked on.
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 5:16 PM, John Travers jtr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 10:44:47 PM UTC+2, Mason
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 2:18:18 PM UTC-7, Stefan Karpinski wrote:
It may not address the cross-module aspect well. We didn't have modules
when I write it originally, so any documentation of that interaction would
necessarily be tacked on.
Modules comes after Methods, so Modules could
I've long enjoyed ruby's `loop` keyword for exactly this type of use.
Cameron
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Stefan Karpinski ste...@karpinski.orgwrote:
Eh, doesn't seem that hard to write `while true` and `while` by itself is
kind of confusing. I also don't necessarily think this is how
El lunes, 7 de abril de 2014 20:09:47 UTC-5, Jameson escribió:
`using X` will always prefer an existing module Main.X over reading
code off of the hard drive.
or you can prefix it with `include(../DataStructures.jl)`
you may also consider putting your testsuite in a module also (and/or
It looks like those GLPK binaries are Visual Studio builds, and as I
understand it recent versions of GMP are difficult if not impossible to
compile with Visual Studio. In fact GMP was forked into MPIR
(http://www.mpir.org/#about), with one major motivation being MSVC support.
MPIR might be
Thank you for your answers. Unfortunately, (pre)-compiled binaries,
dll, etc, is like Chinese for me. Moreover when you talk about GLP I
don't know if you talk about the C library or the julia Package. Currently
I was just trying GLPK for fun so this is not important. Thank you again.
34 matches
Mail list logo
