2008/8/17 Charles R Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I have nothing against extensions when they can be made to serve. If a
dictionary gets added to ndarrays I hope it is done that way, likewise for
generalized ufuncs. In the present case I think Travis wants to preserve the
functionality while
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Charles R Harris
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have nothing against extensions when they can be made to serve. If a
dictionary gets added to ndarrays I hope it is done that way, likewise for
generalized ufuncs.
But that's a totally different matter. You can
David Cournapeau wrote:
Does that mean we will continue breaking the ABI from time to time
during the 1.* cycle ?
Jon Wright wrote:
Can someone help me to understand me what is the compelling reason for
this change? If it only means everyone recompiles, it is hard to see
what we, as users,
Aside from more operators needed, is there a consensus
view among the developers?
Taking a user's perspective, I see a short run and a long
run.
SR: I am very comfortable with adding dot versions of operators.
I am not worried about reversing the Matlab/GAUSS meanings,
but if others are very
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 6:01 AM, Alan G Isaac [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aside from more operators needed, is there a consensus
view among the developers?
I don't think so, but given that pep 225 exists and is fully fleshed
out, I guess it should be considered the starting point of the
discussion
But would it be not-trivial to enter times ans alike unicode symbols within
normal text editors? Otherwise it is a compelling proposition at first glance.
Nadav.
-הודעה מקורית-
מאת: [EMAIL PROTECTED] בשם Alan G Isaac
נשלח: א 17-אוגוסט-08 16:01
אל: Discussion of Numerical Python
נושא:
Nadav Horesh wrote:
But would it be not-trivial to enter times ans alike
unicode symbols within normal text editors? Otherwise it
is a compelling proposition at first glance.
First, what is a normal text editor?
Handling utf-8 seems pretty common these days.
Fernando Perez wrote:
For something as big as this, they would
definitely want to work off a real pep.
What might be interesting, for those who want to experiment
with this syntax, is to take my Python parser for Python
(python4ply - http://www.dalkescientific.com/Python/python4ply.html )
and
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 11:10:11AM -0700, Fernando Perez wrote:
LR: It would be great to use unicode math operators.
On this issue, Fortress is being foresightful.
Accepting the times symbol would be a fairly small move
for most users, since it is in the Latin 1 extension of
ASCII.
Gaël Varoquaux wrote:
Anybody care for '.*'?
That's border-line case, and probably on the bad
idea side because 1.*2 already means something in
normal Python. If added there would be a difference
between
1.*2
and
1 .*2
This problem already exists. Consider
1 .__str__()
'1'
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 09:33:33PM +0200, Andrew Dalke wrote:
Gaël Varoquaux wrote:
Anybody care for '.*'?
That's border-line case, and probably on the bad
idea side because 1.*2 already means something in
normal Python. If added there would be a difference
between
1.*2
and
1 .*2
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Gael Varoquaux
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 11:10:11AM -0700, Fernando Perez wrote:
LR: It would be great to use unicode math operators.
On this issue, Fortress is being foresightful.
Accepting the times symbol would be a fairly small
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 7:01 AM, Alan G Isaac [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aside from more operators needed, is there a consensus
view among the developers?
Taking a user's perspective, I see a short run and a long
run.
SR: I am very comfortable with adding dot versions of operators.
I am not
On Aug 17, 2008, at 9:38 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
And here is a bit of unicode just so we can see how it looks for
various folks.
A = B⊛C
Or write B \circledast C ? (Or \oast?) Try using Google to search
for that character.
Andrew
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 1:58 PM, Andrew Dalke [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Aug 17, 2008, at 9:38 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
And here is a bit of unicode just so we can see how it looks for
various folks.
A = B⊛C
Or write B \circledast C ? (Or \oast?) Try using Google to search
for
Gael Varoquaux wrote:
I am very much against unicode operators. I can see a huge
amount of problems this will generate, for little gain.
I actually basically like PEP 225,
although I find @*, @+, etc more
readable, and to provide the right
visual emphasis. (Rather than ~*, ~+, etc.)
Andrew Dalke wrote:
Or write B \circledast C ? (Or \oast?) Try using Google to search
for that character.
unicodedata.lookup('CIRCLED ASTERISK OPERATOR')
'⊛'
___
Numpy-discussion mailing list
Numpy-discussion@scipy.org
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 7:03 AM, Fernando Perez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
[ please keep all replies to this only on the numpy list. I'm cc'ing
the scipy ones to make others aware of the topic, but do NOT reply on
those lists so we can have an organized thread for future reference]
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 17:00, Ondrej Certik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is some inconsistency though, for example one can override A() +
A(), but one cannot override 1 + 1. This could (should) be fixed
somehow.
This is getting off-topic, but I really hope that never changes. The
difference
On Aug 17, 2008, at 10:35 PM, Christian Heimes wrote:
Andrew Dalke wrote:
Or write B \circledast C ? (Or \oast?) Try using Google to search
for that character.
unicodedata.lookup('CIRCLED ASTERISK OPERATOR')
'⊛'
I mean, go to Google and search for ⊛.
It finds no hits.
I didn't even
On Aug 18, 2008, at 12:00 AM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
There is some inconsistency though, for example one can override A() +
A(), but one cannot override 1 + 1. This could (should) be fixed
somehow.
That will never, ever change in Python. There's no benefit
to being able to redefine int.__add__
Hi All,
I received an email from Hans Andreas -- the gen-ufuncs guy -- and he is
unable to post to the list even though subscribed. Anyone know what might be
the problem? Please cc [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you reply to this
post.
Chuck
___
Numpy-discussion
I am sorry that our submission
http://projects.scipy.org/scipy/numpy/ticket/887 has created some
annoyance; presumably we have taken the Make contributions (e.g. code
patches), (...) by submitting a 'ticket' on the Trac pages linked below
on http://scipy.org/Developer_Zone somewhat too literally.
Charles R Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Hi All,
I received an email from Hans Andreas -- the gen-ufuncs guy -- and he
is
unable to post to the list even though subscribed. Anyone know what
might be
the problem? Please cc [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you reply to
Stéfan van der Walt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL
PROTECTED]...
Hi all,
I have moved the generalised ufuncs functionality off to a branch:
http://svn.scipy.org/svn/numpy/branches/gen_ufuncs
Please try it out and give us your feedback. We shall also pound on
it at the sprint
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 19:13, Engel, Hans-Andreas
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am sorry that our submission
http://projects.scipy.org/scipy/numpy/ticket/887 has created some
annoyance; presumably we have taken the Make contributions (e.g. code
patches), (...) by submitting a 'ticket' on the
Hello,
Thanks to heroic efforts by Chris Galvan this weekend, and significant
efforts by the team that finalized ETS 3.0.0 this week, we've been able
to publish public beta releases of EPD with Py2.5 v4.0.30001 Beta1 for
Windows and Mac OS X today. I've uploaded them to the downloads website
and
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Engel, Hans-Andreas
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am sorry that our submission
http://projects.scipy.org/scipy/numpy/ticket/887 has created some
annoyance; presumably we have taken the Make contributions (e.g. code
patches), (...) by submitting a 'ticket' on the
2008/8/17 Robert Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I suggested that we move it to a branch for the time being so we can
play with it and come up with examples of its use.
That branch is here:
http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/svn/numpy/branches/gen_ufuncs
Stéfan
___
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Stéfan van der Walt [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
2008/8/17 Robert Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I suggested that we move it to a branch for the time being so we can
play with it and come up with examples of its use.
That branch is here:
http://[EMAIL
2008/8/17 Robert Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I suggested that we move it to a branch for the time being so we can
play with it and come up with examples of its use. If you have
examples that you have already written, I would love to see them. I,
for one, am amenable to seeing this in 1.2.0, but
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 21:55, Anne Archibald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/8/17 Robert Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I suggested that we move it to a branch for the time being so we can
play with it and come up with examples of its use. If you have
examples that you have already written, I would
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 9:15 PM, Robert Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 21:55, Anne Archibald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
2008/8/17 Robert Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I suggested that we move it to a branch for the time being so we can
play with it and come up with
33 matches
Mail list logo
