On 11 February 2010 09:52, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
we don't stand much to lose by naming
this next ABI-breaking release 1.5.
Except the accepted policy will be discarded and we will have to start all
over again. We can't change policy on a whim and still maintain
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
...this should be purely technical IMO. There are well established rules
here:
Simple, eh. The version should be 2.0.
It would be simple if it were not for the obligation of getting it
soon, in a matter of
Hi,
Just a comment: I would like to point out that there is (necessarily)
some arbitrary threshold to who is being recognized as people who are
actively writing the code. Over the last year, I have posted fixes
for multiple bugs and extended the ufunc wrapping mechanisms
(__array_prepare__)
2010/2/11 Stéfan van der Walt ste...@sun.ac.za:
On 11 February 2010 09:52, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
Simple, eh. The version should be 2.0.
I'm going with the element of least surprise: no one will be surprised
when 1.5 is released with ABI changes
I'll buy you a
Keith Goodman:
No one answered my post either :(
http://old.nabble.com/arrays-and-__eq__-td26987903.html#a26987903
Is it the same issue?
First, before I post the package on github, I dived into Keith's
problem, and here comes the explanation to the wreid behaviour:
I used the code:
class
2010/2/11 Stéfan van der Walt ste...@sun.ac.za:
Could you please put your undarray as well as the ufunc-wrapper
online (preferably in a repository) so that we can have a look?
Done, github.com/friedrichromsted/upy . Have fun with it :-) ! And
thanks a lot in advance for your help. You will
On 11 February 2010 15:38, Darren Dale dsdal...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/2/11 Stéfan van der Walt ste...@sun.ac.za:
On 11 February 2010 09:52, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com
wrote:
Simple, eh. The version should be 2.0.
I'm going with the element of least surprise: no one will be
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:27 AM, Friedrich Romstedt
friedrichromst...@gmail.com wrote:
Keith Goodman:
No one answered my post either :(
http://old.nabble.com/arrays-and-__eq__-td26987903.html#a26987903
Is it the same issue?
First, before I post the package on github, I dived into Keith's
2010/2/11 Stéfan van der Walt ste...@sun.ac.za
On 11 February 2010 15:38, Darren Dale dsdal...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/2/11 Stéfan van der Walt ste...@sun.ac.za:
On 11 February 2010 09:52, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com
wrote:
Simple, eh. The version should be 2.0.
I'm going
Hi Keith,
2010/2/11 Keith Goodman kwgood...@gmail.com:
Is there some way to tell numpy to use my __eq__ instead of its own?
That would solve my problem. I had a similar problem with __radd__
which was solved by setting __array_priority__ = 10. But that doesn't
work in this case.
It's quite
Oh Sorry, I typed some keys, don't know what I did precisely, but the
message was sent prematurely. Now I repeat:
Hi Keith,
2010/2/11 Keith Goodman kwgood...@gmail.com:
Is there some way to tell numpy to use my __eq__ instead of its own?
That would solve my problem. I had a similar problem
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Friedrich Romstedt
friedrichromst...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Keith,
2010/2/11 Keith Goodman kwgood...@gmail.com:
Is there some way to tell numpy to use my __eq__ instead of its own?
That would solve my problem. I had a similar problem with __radd__
which was
Hey! You broke my numpy :)
def addbug(x, y):
...: return x - y
...:
old_funcs = np.set_numeric_ops(add=addbug)
np.array([1]) + np.array([1])
array([0])
Yea, that's what I meant. Great.
:-) :-)
Friedrich
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Friedrich Romstedt
friedrichromst...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey! You broke my numpy :)
def addbug(x, y):
...: return x - y
...:
old_funcs = np.set_numeric_ops(add=addbug)
np.array([1]) + np.array([1])
array([0])
Yea, that's what I meant. Great.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Keith Goodman kwgood...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Friedrich Romstedt
friedrichromst...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey! You broke my numpy :)
def addbug(x, y):
...: return x - y
...:
old_funcs = np.set_numeric_ops(add=addbug)
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:43 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Keith Goodman kwgood...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Friedrich Romstedt
friedrichromst...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey! You broke my numpy :)
def addbug(x, y):
...: return x -
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 14:40, Keith Goodman kwgood...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Friedrich Romstedt
friedrichromst...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey! You broke my numpy :)
def addbug(x, y):
...: return x - y
...:
old_funcs = np.set_numeric_ops(add=addbug)
Robert Kern:
def numpy_ops(**ops):
old_ops = np.set_numeric_ops(**ops)
try:
yield
finally:
np.set_numeric_ops(**old_ops)
with numpy_ops(multiply=...):
print np.array([1, 2, 3]) * np.array([1, 2, 3])
Well, at least for me in Py 2.5 this fails with:
2010/2/11 josef.p...@gmail.com:
If this is global it won't work, because only the last package that
changes it wins. ??
Hm, at the current implementation of upy you're right, but I think you
can do in the resp. module like:
original_numpy_ops = numpy.set_numeric_ops()
[ ... implementation of
Did you omit the @contextmanager decorator?
Oh, yes! I guessed it would mean: In module contextmanager you write
what follows after the colon? What does this decoration do?
Friedrich
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 14:40, Keith Goodman kwgood...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Friedrich Romstedt
friedrichromst...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey! You broke my numpy :)
def addbug(x, y):
...:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 15:14, Friedrich Romstedt
friedrichromst...@gmail.com wrote:
Did you omit the @contextmanager decorator?
Oh, yes! I guessed it would mean: In module contextmanager you write
what follows after the colon? What does this decoration do?
It turns certain
2010/2/11 Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com:
It turns certain specifically-written generators into full context managers.
http://docs.python.org/library/contextlib#contextlib.contextmanager
Ok, thanks! I didn't know about before. (To the anonymous reader
seeking for information as me:
2010/2/11 Keith Goodman kwgood...@gmail.com:
The problem I have now is that I don't know where to place the line of
code that changes the meaning of numpy's equal. I don't know when
someone will do
Well, I think a solution is as written before to put a test whether
the other operand is in fact
Friedrich Romstedt wrote:
2010/2/11 Keith Goodman kwgood...@gmail.com:
The problem I have now is that I don't know where to place the line of
code that changes the meaning of numpy's equal. I don't know when
someone will do
Well, I think a solution is as written before to put a test whether
The annual US Scientific Computing with Python Conference, SciPy, has
been held at Caltech since it began in 2001. While we always love an
excuse to go to California, it’s also important to make sure that we
allow everyone an opportunity to attend the conference. So, as Jarrod
Millman
On Feb 11, 2010, at 2:05 AM, David Cournapeau wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
...this should be purely technical IMO. There are well established
rules
here:
Simple, eh. The version should be 2.0.
It would be simple if it were
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Travis Oliphant oliph...@enthought.com wrote:
I don't want to go the route of marking things experimental which David's
pro-1.5 vote seemed to advocate.
In that case, I prefer the new release to be marked as 2.0. There will
then be no new numpy 1.4.x, and
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/2/11 Stéfan van der Walt ste...@sun.ac.za
On 11 February 2010 15:38, Darren Dale dsdal...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/2/11 Stéfan van der Walt ste...@sun.ac.za:
On 11 February 2010 09:52, Charles R Harris
On Feb 11, 2010, at 5:57 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/2/11 Stéfan van der Walt ste...@sun.ac.za
On 11 February 2010 15:38, Darren Dale dsdal...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/2/11 Stéfan van der Walt
Hi,
I don't want to go the route of marking things experimental which David's
pro-1.5 vote seemed to advocate. From what I gathered, Pauli, David, and I
were 1.5 with various degrees of opinion and Charles, and Robert are 2.0.
Others that I know about: Stephan is 1.5, Jarrod is 2.0,
to, 2010-02-11 kello 16:38 -0600, Travis Oliphant kirjoitti:
[clip]
Pauli, David, and Stephan, how opposed are you to numbering the next
release as NumPy 2.0 with no experimental tag or the like. If you
three could also agree. I could see my way through to supporting a
NumPy 2.0 release.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Pierre GM pgmdevl...@gmail.com wrote:
Jus to make sure I understand:
* 2.0 will be w/ datetime support and corresponds to the current trunk
* 1.5 will be w/o datetime support ?
I may have misunderstood, but my understanding is that there will be
no 1.5 release
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Jarrod Millman mill...@berkeley.eduwrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Pierre GM pgmdevl...@gmail.com wrote:
Jus to make sure I understand:
* 2.0 will be w/ datetime support and corresponds to the current trunk
* 1.5 will be w/o datetime support ?
I
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 18:23, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
What about python version? Do we want to bump that up from 2.4?
Only if it were *really* necessary for the Python 3 port. Otherwise, I
would resist the urge.
--
Robert Kern
I have come to believe that the whole
On Feb 11, 2010, at 6:25 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 18:23, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
What about python version? Do we want to bump that up from 2.4?
Only if it were *really* necessary for the Python 3 port. Otherwise, I
would resist the urge.
One question:
Does anyone think it's a good idea to provide any support for numpy
version selection, similar to wxPython's wxversion? What it does is
allow an installation to have default version that gets imported with
import wx. Optionally, other versions can be installed, and selected
by
Robert Kern wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 18:23, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
What about python version? Do we want to bump that up from 2.4?
Only if it were *really* necessary for the Python 3 port. Otherwise, I
would resist the urge.
Me too, on the basis that 2.4
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 18:46, Christopher Barker chris.bar...@noaa.gov wrote:
One question:
Does anyone think it's a good idea to provide any support for numpy
version selection, similar to wxPython's wxversion?
-1. It complicates packaging and distribution substantially.
--
Robert Kern
I
Charles R Harris wrote:
I do think a 1.4.1 should be released without the datetime changes just
so there would be an updated version out there for slow adopters. We
wouldn't maintain it, though, it would be the end of the 1.x line.
We could make a source release - we could do it from the
On Feb 11, 2010, at 7:03 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
I do think a 1.4.1 should be released without the datetime changes
just
so there would be an updated version out there for slow adopters. We
wouldn't maintain it, though, it would be the end of the 1.x line.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 6:03 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jpwrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
I do think a 1.4.1 should be released without the datetime changes just
so there would be an updated version out there for slow adopters. We
wouldn't maintain it, though, it would be the
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:23 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jp wrote:
Travis Oliphant wrote:
This is true, but you could make a NumPy 1.4.x binary and the old
SciPy binary would still presumably work.
There is still the cython issue, although it concerns only some packages
(stats
josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
So 1.4.1 wouldn't resolve the cython issue, packages that use cython
still would need to be refreshed and recompiled, but non-cython
packages should run without recompiling?
It is impossible to solve the cython issue in numpy. The only solution
is to regenerate
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:36 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jp wrote:
josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
So 1.4.1 wouldn't resolve the cython issue, packages that use cython
still would need to be refreshed and recompiled, but non-cython
packages should run without recompiling?
It is
josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
scipy is relatively easy to compile, I was thinking also of h5py,
pytables and pymc (b/c of pytables), none of them are importing with
numpy 1.4.0 because of the cython issue.
As I said, all of them will have to be regenerated with cython 0.12.1.
There is no other
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:00 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jpwrote:
josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
scipy is relatively easy to compile, I was thinking also of h5py,
pytables and pymc (b/c of pytables), none of them are importing with
numpy 1.4.0 because of the cython issue.
As I
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:00 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jp
mailto:da...@silveregg.co.jp wrote:
josef.p...@gmail.com mailto:josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
scipy is relatively easy to compile, I was thinking also of h5py,
pytables and
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:12 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jpwrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:00 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jp
mailto:da...@silveregg.co.jp wrote:
josef.p...@gmail.com mailto:josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:12 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jp
wrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:00 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jp
Is it just the metadata element in the dtype structure or were other
objects affected.
--
(mobile phone of)
Travis Oliphant
Enthought, Inc.
1-512-536-1057
http://www.enthought.com
On Feb 11, 2010, at 9:12 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jp
wrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu,
Hi everyone,
Does anyone know if there is an implementation of rank 1 updates (and
downdates) to a Cholesky factorization in NumPy or SciPy? It looks
there are a bunch of routines for it in LINPACK, but not LAPACK.
Thanks,
David
___
NumPy-Discussion
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Darren Dale dsdal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:12 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jp
wrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:12 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jp
mailto:da...@silveregg.co.jp wrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:00 PM, David Cournapeau
da...@silveregg.co.jp mailto:da...@silveregg.co.jp
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Darren Dale dsdal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:12 PM, David
Charles R Harris wrote:
I don't see any struct definitions there, it looks clean.
Any struct defined outside numpy/core/include is fine to change at will
as far as ABI is concerned anyway, so no need to check anything :)
David
___
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 10:03 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jpwrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:12 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jp
mailto:da...@silveregg.co.jp wrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 10:16 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jpwrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
I don't see any struct definitions there, it looks clean.
Any struct defined outside numpy/core/include is fine to change at will
as far as ABI is concerned anyway, so no need to
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 10:03 PM, David Cournapeau
da...@silveregg.co.jp mailto:da...@silveregg.co.jp wrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:12 PM, David Cournapeau
da...@silveregg.co.jp mailto:da...@silveregg.co.jp
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 10:28 PM, David Cournapeau da...@silveregg.co.jpwrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 10:03 PM, David Cournapeau
da...@silveregg.co.jp mailto:da...@silveregg.co.jp wrote:
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010
Charles R Harris wrote:
Well, so it goes. I don't see any reasonable way to fix that. I wonder
how recent the cython size check is?
See related discussion on Cython ML - the problem is known for some
time. That's when cython fixed the error into a warning that I started
looking into the
61 matches
Mail list logo
