OK, here's a patch for:
#718: Bug with numpy.float32.tolist
Can someone commit it (I hope someone has committed the other patches
i've sent)?
James
--- arrayobject.c.old 2008-04-06 13:08:37.0 +0100
+++ arrayobject.c 2008-04-06 13:10:57.0 +0100
@@ -1870,8 +1870,11 @@
if
James Philbin wrote:
OK, here's a patch for:
#718: Bug with numpy.float32.tolist
Can someone commit it (I hope someone has committed the other patches
i've sent)?
I don't think this patch should be committed without more discussion.
This changes behavior and it is intentional that
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008, James Philbin apparently wrote:
OK, here's a patch for:
#718: Bug with numpy.float32.tolist
My impression has always been that to ensure
a patch gets appropriate consideration it
should be attached to a ticket...
fwiw,
Alan Isaac
On 06/04/2008, Alan G Isaac [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008, James Philbin apparently wrote:
OK, here's a patch for:
#718: Bug with numpy.float32.tolist
My impression has always been that to ensure
a patch gets appropriate consideration it
should be attached to a
I've posted patches for:
#630: If float('123.45') works, so should numpy.float32('123.45')
#581: random.set_state does not reset state of random.standard_normal
James
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Anne Archibald
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 04/04/2008, Travis E. Oliphant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 05/04/2008, James Philbin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've posted patches for:
#630: If float('123.45') works, so should numpy.float32('123.45')
#581: random.set_state does not reset state of random.standard_normal
Patches for #601, #622, #692, #696, #717 now in trac; I'd like to do
On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Anne Archibald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 05/04/2008, James Philbin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've posted patches for:
#630: If float('123.45') works, so should numpy.float32('123.45')
#581: random.set_state does not reset state of random.standard_normal
On 05/04/2008, Charles R Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Anne Archibald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
More generally, my local working copy is now rater divergent from the
upstream. What's the recommended way to deal with this? Make sure I
have all the patches
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 9:36 PM, Jarrod Millman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Again, if you have any time to help close tickets or improve
documentation, please take the time over the next few days to do so.
And thank you to everyone who has been working to get this release
ready!
Since I sent
On 04/04/2008, Jarrod Millman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since I sent my email last night another 5+ tickets have been closed.
If we keep going at this rate, we should be able to release 1.0.5 next
Friday (4/11) with every ticket closed. Specifically, thanks to
Travis Oliphant, David Huard,
Anne Archibald wrote:
On 04/04/2008, Jarrod Millman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since I sent my email last night another 5+ tickets have been closed.
If we keep going at this rate, we should be able to release 1.0.5 next
Friday (4/11) with every ticket closed. Specifically, thanks to
On 04/04/2008, Travis E. Oliphant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey Anne,
Do you currently have SVN access? Would you like it?
I think the SciPy/NumPy sprint would be a good time to clean-up the
committers list and add new people interested in helping.
I don't have SVN access. I'd be happy
Hello,
I know that I am beginning to sound like a broken record, but I think
we are finally ready to roll out NumPy 1.0.5. Since my last email
about 60 bug tickets have been closed. As of tonight I believe that
there is no know regressions to justify further delaying this release.
Unless
13 matches
Mail list logo
