[julia-users] Good iOS keyboard for Julia?

Anyone know of a good iPhone/iPad keyboard for typing out Julia and Markdown code? I think I just want a regular keyboard with extra rows with common keys like `, $, ^, 0…9, etc. I found "SciKey" but it doesn't look like it does everything on one screen. "Markdown Keyboard" looks better,

Re: [julia-users] Re: canonical binary representation for Array

Thank you, Tobi. michele On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 7:35 PM, 'Tobias Knopp' via julia-users < julia-users@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Dear Michele, > > yes the assumption is absolutely valid. Julia arrays are stored > column-major ordered in memory and this will not change. Since write does > only

Re: [julia-users] Re: Float64: 1.0 vs. 1.

See also here: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/julia-users/hIVawSgFvOs/9EpbqwWWBgAJ and the conclusion was: avoid writing 1. (which will not be allowed by the parser some time) and write 1.0 instead. On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 3:40 AM, J Luis wrote: > It parses .+ as

Re: [julia-users] String escape when ccall-ing DLL functions on Windows

On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 1:22 PM, 中山慎太郎 wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to ccall my DLL as follows : > > function start(args :: Array{String, 1}) > return ccall((:TestFunction, "mydll.dll"), Int32, (Int32, > Ptr{Ptr{UInt8}}), length(args), args) > end > > The C declaration is

[julia-users] Re: Float64: 1.0 vs. 1.

It parses .+ as broadcasting of two Ints. Do instead typeof(1. +1) Float64 segunda-feira, 24 de Outubro de 2016 às 02:33:15 UTC+1, christop...@unibas.ch escreveu: > > What is the difference between 1.0 and 1. ? > Both are of type Float64, but adding 1 leads to the result 2.0, i.e., >

[julia-users] String escape when ccall-ing DLL functions on Windows

Hello, I'm trying to ccall my DLL as follows : function start(args :: Array{String, 1}) return ccall((:TestFunction, "mydll.dll"), Int32, (Int32, Ptr{Ptr{UInt8 }}), length(args), args) end The C declaration is as follows : extern int TestFunction(int argc, char * argv[]); The problem

[julia-users] Float64: 1.0 vs. 1.

What is the difference between 1.0 and 1. ? Both are of type Float64, but adding 1 leads to the result 2.0, i.e., Float64, in the first case, and 2, i.e., Int64 in the second. _ _ _ _(_)_ | A fresh approach to technical computing (_) | (_) (_)|

Re: [julia-users] Re: BLAS.set_num_threads() and peakflops scaling

At least with my experience on a mac, I've never seen real linear algebra code (not just peakflps) in Julia + OpenBLAS saturate more than 2 cores, even when setting the thread count to 4 on a machine with 4 real cores. When I try similar code on a linux machine I have access to, I never have

Re: [julia-users] Re: Nemo AcbField error

Well it downloads some source as well, but it isn't used. On 23 October 2016 at 21:59, digxx wrote: > or does it try to download the source here upon Pkg.build("Nemo") ? >

Re: [julia-users] Re: Nemo AcbField error

or does it try to download the source here upon Pkg.build("Nemo") ?

Re: [julia-users] Re: Nemo AcbField error

Well so far nothing has changed ;) So: while loading C:\cygwin64\home\Diger\.julia\v0.5\Nemo\deps\build.jl, in expression starting on line 1 % Total% Received % Xferd Average Speed TimeTime Time Current Dload Upload Total SpentLeft

Re: [julia-users] Re: Nemo AcbField error

No, on Windows it doesn't build from source, but downloads binaries. After the downloading is done, that's it. It should be ready to use. If you still have the same problem, maybe we need to rebuild one of the binaries for you. I'll have to talk to Tommy and see what he knows about this problem.

Re: [julia-users] Re: Nemo AcbField error

Maybe I should have pointed out that I'm on windows...

Re: [julia-users] Re: Nemo AcbField error

What do u mean that explains why it doesn't go any further? Is Nemo not finished yet for Windows?

Re: [julia-users] Re: Nemo AcbField error

Ah, you are on Windows. That explains why it doesn't go on any further. I will have to ask Tommy why he thought this was a Pari problem. I don't see it from the error you reported. Bill. On 23 October 2016 at 21:28, digxx wrote: > No it does not go on...When I manually

Re: [julia-users] Re: Nemo AcbField error

> > No it does not go on...When I manually start Pkg.build("Nemo") in the same > session I get: > julia> Pkg.build("Nemo") INFO: Building Nemo WARNING: `@windows` is deprecated, use `@static is_windows()` instead in depwarn(::String, ::Symbol) at .\deprecated.jl:64 in @windows(::Any, ::Any) at

Re: [julia-users] Re: Nemo AcbField error

The above shows that everything downloaded ok, I think. Did it not then go on and rebuild everything? Bill. On 23 October 2016 at 21:11, digxx wrote: > It does not work either. When I run Pkg.build("Nemo") it starts > > julia> Pkg.build("Nemo") > INFO: Building Nemo >

[julia-users] Re: Nemo AcbField error

It does not work either. When I run Pkg.build("Nemo") it starts julia> Pkg.build("Nemo") INFO: Building Nemo WARNING: `@windows` is deprecated, use `@static is_windows()` instead in depwarn(::String, ::Symbol) at .\deprecated.jl:64 in @windows(::Any, ::Any) at .\deprecated.jl:472 in

[julia-users] Julia-i18n: Reviewers needed!

Reviewers needed help us bring #JuliaLang website to your native language ...one string at a time! Kudos to Akis Vassiliadis for completing 33% of the Greek translations by himself and with that moving his language to the top of the list!

Re: [julia-users] Re: Julia types newbie question

Hi Simon, Simon Danisch writes: > There is a speed difference, which you can see beautifully like this: > > function _sum{T}(::Type{T}, A) > r = zero(T) > @inbounds for i in eachindex(A) > r += T(A[i]) > end > r > end > great, thanks. My machine seems to be way slower that

Re: [julia-users] Re: canonical binary representation for Array

Dear Michele, yes the assumption is absolutely valid. Julia arrays are stored column-major ordered in memory and this will not change. Since write does only dump the memory on disk this is also not going to change. Cheers, Tobi Am Mittwoch, 19. Oktober 2016 09:03:49 UTC+2 schrieb Michele