I would agree that the set should be minimal at first, but would comment that
we should still have a better taxonomy of functions that should be supported,
in terms of the functionality they provide and functionality that is required
for them to work. E.g. __setitem__ needs immutability.
Best
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 3:45 AM Dashamir Hoxha wrote:
>
> Would it be useful if we could integrate the documentation system with a
> discussion forum (like Discourse.org)? Each function can be linked to its
> own discussion topic, where users and developers can discuss about the
> function,
> Exactly. This is great, thanks Marten. I agree with pretty much everything in
> this list.
For my part, a few things immediately popped out at my that I disagree with. ;-)
Which does not mean it isn’t a useful exercise, but it does mean we
should expect a fair bit of debate.
But I do think
Hi everybody, There are only a few days left to submit to the 2019 John
Hunter Excellence in Plotting Contest! If you're interested in
participating, note that you have until June 8th to prepare your
submission.
In memory of John Hunter, we are pleased to be reviving the SciPy John
Hunter
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 1:08 PM Marten van Kerkwijk <
m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 2:21 PM Eric Wieser
> wrote:
>
>> Some of your categories here sound like they might be suitable for ABCs
>> that provide mixin methods, which is something I think Hameer suggested
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 2:21 PM Eric Wieser
wrote:
> Some of your categories here sound like they might be suitable for ABCs
> that provide mixin methods, which is something I think Hameer suggested in
> the past. Perhaps it's worth re-exploring that avenue.
>
> Eric
>
>
Indeed, and of course for
Some of your categories here sound like they might be suitable for ABCs
that provide mixin methods, which is something I think Hameer suggested in
the past. Perhaps it's worth re-exploring that avenue.
Eric
On Sat, Jun 1, 2019, 18:18 Marten van Kerkwijk
wrote:
>
> Our API is huge. A simple
Re: Successful specifications (I’ll avoid using the word standard):
Moving: HTML5/CSS3, C++, Rust, Python, Java.
Static: C
I’d really like this to be a moving spec... A static one is never much use, and
is doomed to miss use cases, either today or some from the future.
Best Regards,
Hameer
On Sun, 2019-06-02 at 08:38 +0200, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 3:18 AM Marten van Kerkwijk <
> m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Our API is huge. A simple count:
> > > main namespace: 600
> > > fft: 30
> > > linalg: 30
> > > random: 60
> > > ndarray: 70
> > > lib: 20
>
On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 11:58 AM Ralf Gommers
wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 2:19 AM Charles R Harris <
> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 4:09 PM Ralf Gommers
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> On Thursday I had the pleasure to be at GitHub Satellite,
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 12:44 PM Dashamir Hoxha wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 12:12 PM Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
>
>>
Would it be useful if we could integrate the documentation system with
a discussion forum (like Discourse.org)? Each function can be linked to its
own discussion
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 12:12 PM Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>>> Would it be useful if we could integrate the documentation system with a
>>> discussion forum (like Discourse.org)? Each function can be linked to its
>>> own discussion topic, where users and developers can discuss about the
>>>
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 12:07 PM Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 10:53 AM Dashamir Hoxha
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 10:01 AM Ralf Gommers
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks! I know this is going to be a little complicated to get everyone
>>> on the same page. That's
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 10:53 AM Dashamir Hoxha wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 10:01 AM Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks! I know this is going to be a little complicated to get everyone
>> on the same page. That's why I'm aiming to get a draft out before SciPy'19
>> so there's a chance
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 10:01 AM Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
> Thanks! I know this is going to be a little complicated to get everyone on
> the same page. That's why I'm aiming to get a draft out before SciPy'19 so
> there's a chance to discuss it in person with everyone who is there.
> Mailing lists
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 9:46 AM Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 11:59 PM Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 12:35 AM Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:05 PM Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> >> > I think this is potentially useful, but *far* more
On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 11:59 PM Ralf Gommers wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 12:35 AM Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:05 PM Ralf Gommers wrote:
>> > I think this is potentially useful, but *far* more prescriptive and
>> > detailed than I had in mind. Both you and
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 12:35 AM Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:05 PM Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> > I think this is potentially useful, but *far* more prescriptive and
> detailed than I had in mind. Both you and Nathaniel seem to have not
> understood what I mean by "out of
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 12:33 AM Dashamir Hoxha wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:05 PM Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I think this is potentially useful, but *far* more prescriptive and
>> detailed than I had in mind. Both you and Nathaniel seem to have not
>> understood what I mean by "out of
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 3:18 AM Marten van Kerkwijk <
m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Our API is huge. A simple count:
>> main namespace: 600
>> fft: 30
>> linalg: 30
>> random: 60
>> ndarray: 70
>> lib: 20
>> lib.npyio: 35
>> etc. (many more ill-thought out but not clearly private
20 matches
Mail list logo
