[julia-users] Re: BinDeps / LoadError: Path /home/travis/.julia/v0.5/TALib/deps/src/ta-lib-0.4.0-src was not created successfully

I'm doing provides(BuildProcess, Autotools(libtarget = "libta_lib", configure_options=["--prefix=/usr"]), libta_lib, os = :Unix) Is --prefix=/usr "local prefix" or a "system-wide" prefix ? If it's a system-wide prefix... how to use a local prefix ? Sorry for my newbies questions about

Re: [julia-users] Re: macro: with

It's a lot like unpacking a type, except instead of defining new variables for the unpacked values, your macro places the type instance designation (t. ...). On Sunday, October 9, 2016 at 10:55:45 AM UTC-7, Tom Breloff wrote: > > What about it? I don't think there's anything like this in

[julia-users] Re: Setting/getting field-like members with side effects

That was one of the suggestions?

[julia-users] redefining Base method for `show`

I want to change show for Symbol, Rational, and Bool. Till now, I simply overwrote the existing methods. This works great. I get what I want, even in warn and error and string interpolation, etc. It works flawlessly on v0.4, v0.5, and v0.6. But, this changes the behavior for everyone. So, I

[julia-users] Re: Setting/getting field-like members with side effects

What about nested modules? Or unpure functions chained with the pipe operator? On Sunday, October 9, 2016 at 11:26:57 AM UTC-4, Bart Janssens wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm thinking about how to translate a Python interface that makes > extensive use of __getattr__ and __setattr__ overloading to

[julia-users] Re: macro: with

What about Parameters.jl ? On Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 7:23:47 AM UTC-7, Tom Breloff wrote: > > Hey all... I just threw together a quick macro to save some typing when > working with the fields of an object. Disclaimer: this should not be used >

Re: [julia-users] macro: with

Heh... it took a google search to figure out where I put it. https://github.com/tbreloff/CTechCommon.jl/blob/master/src/macros.jl#L113-L155 On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Ben Lauwens wrote: > Hi Tom > > I am interested. I am building a macro mimicking how iterator

[julia-users] Setting/getting field-like members with side effects

Hi all, I'm thinking about how to translate a Python interface that makes extensive use of __getattr__ and __setattr__ overloading to allow chaining a series of option values like this example: mysolver.linear_system.parameters.solver_type = "GMRES" Each time a . is encountered, the appropriate

[julia-users] macro: with

Hi Tom I am interested. I am building a macro mimicking how iterator blocks are transformed in a state-machine in C# (as an alternative to Tasks) and this is one of the (many) thinks I have to solve. Can you point me to the source? Thanks Ben

[julia-users] Re: Setting/getting field-like members with side effects

Why not use Symbols instead of strings here? On Sunday, October 9, 2016 at 8:26:57 AM UTC-7, Bart Janssens wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm thinking about how to translate a Python interface that makes > extensive use of __getattr__ and __setattr__ overloading to allow chaining > a series of option

[julia-users] Re: julia-i18n: Translators and reviewer needed!

Inspite of initial spur, it took a while for me finish hompage for Turkish page because of the new term starting at my university. I'm not an expert in translation it would be good if some other Turkish speaking user can check and give feedback for my crude translation. On Thursday, September

[julia-users] Re: Setting/getting field-like members with side effects

Missed that one, though it should be mysolver[:linear_system][:parameters][:solver_type] = :GMRES There's no reason for an algorithm choice to be a String. But this entire thing seems wrong-headed. The choice of the solver method should likely be done by dispatching on the solve method

Re: [julia-users] Setting/getting field-like members with side effects

I think that's great, but know that StochasticOptimization is still being designed and will likely change. On Sunday, October 9, 2016, Chris Rackauckas wrote: > Missed that one, though it should be > > mysolver[:linear_system][:parameters][:solver_type] = :GMRES > > There's

[julia-users] Re: travis with dependency on scipy?

Me too. I mean, I found things worked much more smoothly after following this advice to use Conda. Also, Windows and OSX are supported immediately. Also, for my application, the Ubuntu package versions are very old, and out of date. This problem is solved as well. On Friday, October 7, 2016 at

Re: [julia-users] Re: Setting/getting field-like members with side effects

Yes, symbols would be preferred. Checking equality two symbols is quicker, but, more importantly, symbols are natural to Julia metaprogramming/expressions, meaning that if you use symbols then the expression is easier to generate via macros. Tom is getting shy, but really take a look at

Re: [julia-users] Re: macro: with

What about it? I don't think there's anything like this in Parameters. On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Chris Rackauckas wrote: > What about Parameters.jl ? > > > On Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 7:23:47 AM UTC-7, Tom Breloff wrote:

Re: [julia-users] Re: Julia and the Tower of Babel

__JuliaPraxis__ is on [github](https://github.com/JuliaPraxis) and [gitter](https://gitter.im/JuliaPraxis/Lobby), welcoming growth.

[julia-users] Re: Julia and the Tower of Babel

JuliaPraxis is on github and gitter ... bring our praxes. On Saturday, October 8, 2016 at 8:42:05 AM UTC-4, Jeffrey Sarnoff wrote: > > I have created a new Organization on github: *JuliaPraxis.* > Everyone who has added

Re: [julia-users] Re: Setting/getting field-like members with side effects

OK, thanks, so symbols are definitely preferred for the [] variant then? As for using dispatch, I am certainly all for designing a "proper" Julian interface, but the number of parameters here can be daunting, see e.g. here for a more complete example:

[julia-users] Re: Warning since 0.5

On Saturday, October 8, 2016 at 5:09:19 PM UTC-4, digxx wrote: > > is f(x)=x^2 not an anonymous function?!?! > No, it has a name "f". An anonymous function is an expression like "x -> x^2" that creates a function object without binding it to a constant name.

Re: [julia-users] Re: Julia and the Tower of Babel

Great to see this brought up here, and to read the constructive and thought-provoking responses from members of the Julia community. I feel this is highly important and I have thougt a lot about it recently, as I am writing an invited guest editorial for a leading ecological journal about how