In general it's not recommended to use the latest nightly (version 0.4)
(which is under rapid development and likely to break things quite often)
right now. I would recommend switching to the latest 0.3 release (0.3.2 I
believe), which if you have a git clone of the Julia repo you can get by
To get an empty list of polynomials, you can type `Poly[]`. I wouldn't
recommend changing the behavior of the built in reduce function though,
that would definitely be confusing for anyone else who later wants to work
with your module (and who will reasonably expect Base.reduce to return a
I think this sort of thing is usually called a ragged array, you might
find more use cases, examples, etc., googling for that term.
+1 on having a package for this, Array{Array{T}} often feels very awkward.
On Tuesday, September 2, 2014 9:03:56 AM UTC-7, Reid Atcheson wrote:
A common
Hi All—
A while back I was working on a webcrawler and I realized we didn't have a
Julia HTML parser. I also wanted to learn how to wrap C libraries, so I
started working on a wrapper around google's gumbo
https://github.com/google/gumbo-parser library for parsing HTML. The
result, Gumbo.jl,
I suppose I should mention that I have a prototype wrapper of Google's
gumbo HTML parsing library in the
works: https://github.com/porterjamesj/GumboParser.jl
It's not on METADATA and I wouldn't consider the API stable, but everything
seems to work pretty well so far. If you really want to use
for
this? How many people are interested in this?
Gustavo
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:51 AM, James Porter porterjam...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hey all—
As far as Patrick's question goes—
It is true that a lot of the talks at the conference are going to be
about
fairly advanced topics
iterating over a dictionary yields (key, value) tuples:
julia proportionmap([1,1,2,2,3])
[2=0.4,3=0.2,1=0.4]
julia for (k,v) in proportionmap([1,1,2,2,3])
println(k)
end
2
3
1
julia
—James
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 7:26:39 PM UTC-5, Jason Solack wrote:
Hello everyone!
I'm
Hey all—
As far as Patrick's question goes—
It is true that a lot of the talks at the conference are going to be about
fairly advanced topics (Julia internals, a prototype Julia typechecker,
etc.). That said there will also be a number of talks that deal with using
Julia to solve some sort of
The Julia garbage collector does not know about or manage memory you
allocate in external C calls, if you free that memory yourself in your C
code you should see your memory usage improve dramatically.
On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 1:33:30 PM UTC-5, Gustavo Camilo wrote:
Hi all, I have a related
All—
Registration and more details on JuliaCon are now available at juliacon.org
Hope to see many of you there!
On Thursday, April 3, 2014 9:42:37 AM UTC-5, Hunter Owens wrote:
Hey Folks-
Just a quick save-the-date announcement for the first ever Julia
Conference http://juliacon.org that
I have no authority to speak on this but my impression is this is because
functions are a bit special. Data is pretty straightforward to serialize
and send over the wire, but a generic function in Julia is not just an
ordinary object. Defining functions has global side-effects such as
I would recommend just calling addprocs at the very beginning. If you know
your code needs to use multiple processors, may as well say so right away.
On Monday, May 5, 2014 7:25:22 PM UTC-5, Ethan Anderes wrote:
Thanks James:
That's basically the solution that I've got implemented now.
Hi all—
I am fooling around with wrapping a C library which declares a struct in a
similar manner to:
typedef struct Thing {
//other non-union fields here . . .
union {
A a;
B b;
C c;
} stuff;
}
Where A, B, and C are all other structs defined in this
(not sure if it
supports unions).
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 2:25 AM, James Porter porter...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
Hi all—
I am fooling around with wrapping a C library which declares a struct in
a similar manner to:
typedef struct Thing {
//other non-union fields here
Ahh nevermind, I think I see — declaring the stuff field to be the
largest of the possible types and then reinterpreting the result as the
correct type seems to work. Thanks!
On Saturday, May 3, 2014 12:21:18 PM UTC-5, James Porter wrote:
How would I convert manually? Right now I'm trying
Hi Ethan,
Hmmm this is odd, in general you shouldn't need to explicitly send
variables you read in a parallel for loop to other processors. For example:
julia addprocs(4)
4-element Array{Any,1}:
2
3
4
5
julia args1 = 1
1
julia @parallel (+) for i=1:10 args1 end
10
Can you provide a
No problem! Rubber ducking can be an effective debugging technique, even
over the internet :)
On Saturday, May 3, 2014 7:34:21 PM UTC-5, Ethan Anderes wrote:
Now I feel really silly. I had a typo: args1 was erroneously written
arg1...hence the error that the workers couldn't find arg1.
I would recommend installing IPython 2.0 (the latest version),
Pkg.checkout(IJulia) to get the latest there (two weeks can mean fairly
out of date, Julia-land moves quickly for the moment), and upgrading your
emacs packages to the latest, and seeing if that helps (or at the very
least gives a
Hi joanenric—
Julia makes a distinction between column vectors (10-element
Array{Float64,1}) and row vectors (10x1 Array{Float64,2}). You can see this
reflected in how they print:
julia [1,2,3]
3-element Array{Int64,1}:
1
2
3 # column vector
julia [1 2 3]
1x3 Array{Int64,2}:
1 2 3 #
Are you on the latest versions of IPython, IJulia, and all the relevant
emacs packages (websocket, ein, etc.)? I had to upgrade a few things to get
it to work. Does IJulia work fine with the browser interface?
On Thursday, April 10, 2014 3:26:12 PM UTC-5, Andrew Dabrowski wrote:
OK, I just
I've struggled with this exact problem in python in the past (e.g.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16182898/unpacking-parameters-for-a-simulation).
It's exacerbated by the fact that interfaces to solvers, optimizers, etc.
often require the parameters be passed in as a vector, so using
If you want a constant field its probable that you would be better served
by type parameter.
On Sunday, December 22, 2013 3:14:15 PM UTC-6, Marcus Urban wrote:
So, does this also mean that it is not possible to have constant fields
inside a composite type?
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 5:26
22 matches
Mail list logo
