Re: [Numpy-discussion] Request for enhancement to numpy.random.shuffle

2014-10-16 Thread Warren Weckesser
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Sebastian se...@sebix.at wrote: On 2014-10-12 16:54, Warren Weckesser wrote: On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com mailto:robert.k...@gmail.com wrote:

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Request for enhancement to numpy.random.shuffle

2014-10-16 Thread Jaime Fernández del Río
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Warren Weckesser warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Sebastian se...@sebix.at wrote: On 2014-10-12 16:54, Warren Weckesser wrote: On Sun, Oct 12,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Request for enhancement to numpy.random.shuffle

2014-10-16 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Warren Weckesser warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: Regarding names: shuffle/permutation is a terrible naming convention IMHO and shouldn't be propagated further. We already have a good

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Changed behavior of np.gradient

2014-10-16 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On 14 Oct 2014 18:29, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Nathaniel Smith

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Request for enhancement to numpy.random.shuffle

2014-10-16 Thread Warren Weckesser
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Warren Weckesser warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: Regarding names: shuffle/permutation is a terrible naming

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Request for enhancement to numpy.random.shuffle

2014-10-16 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Warren Weckesser warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Warren Weckesser warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Nathaniel Smith

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Changed behavior of np.gradient

2014-10-16 Thread Ariel Rokem
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On 14 Oct 2014 18:29, Charles R Harris

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Changed behavior of np.gradient

2014-10-16 Thread Benjamin Root
It isn't really a question of accuracy. It breaks unit tests and reproducibility elsewhere. My vote is to revert to the old behavior in 1.9.1. Ben Root On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:10 PM, Ariel Rokem aro...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Changed behavior of np.gradient

2014-10-16 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:23 AM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote: It isn't really a question of accuracy. It breaks unit tests and reproducibility elsewhere. My vote is to revert to the old behavior in 1.9.1. Why would one want the 2nd order differences at all, if they're not more

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Request for enhancement to numpy.random.shuffle

2014-10-16 Thread josef.pktd
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Warren Weckesser warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Warren Weckesser

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Changed behavior of np.gradient

2014-10-16 Thread Benjamin Root
That isn't what I meant. Higher order doesn't necessarily mean more accurate. The results simply have different properties. The user needs to choose the differentiation order that they need. One interesting effect in data assimilation/modeling is that even-order differentiation can often have

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Changed behavior of np.gradient

2014-10-16 Thread Matthew Brett
Hi, On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote: That isn't what I meant. Higher order doesn't necessarily mean more accurate. The results simply have different properties. The user needs to choose the differentiation order that they need. One interesting effect in

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Changed behavior of np.gradient

2014-10-16 Thread Charles R Harris
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 8:25 PM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote: That isn't what I meant. Higher order doesn't necessarily mean more accurate. The results simply have different properties. The user needs

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Request for enhancement to numpy.random.shuffle

2014-10-16 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:35 AM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Warren Weckesser warren.weckes...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:

[Numpy-discussion] Passing multiple output arguments to ufunc

2014-10-16 Thread Jaime Fernández del Río
There is an oldish feature request in github (https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/4752), complaining about it not being possible to pass multiple output arguments to a ufunc using keyword arguments. You can pass them all as positional arguments: out1 = np.empty(1) out2 = np.empty(1)