On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Bruce Southey wrote:
> On 02/28/2011 09:02 AM, Benjamin Root wrote:
> [snip]
> >
> >
> > So, is there still no hope in addressing this old bug report of mine?
> >
> > http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/ticket/1562
> >
> > Ben Root
> >
> I think you need to add more d
On 02/28/2011 09:02 AM, Benjamin Root wrote:
[snip]
>
>
> So, is there still no hope in addressing this old bug report of mine?
>
> http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/ticket/1562
>
> Ben Root
>
I think you need to add more details to this. So do you have an example
of the problem that includes code a
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Bruce Southey wrote:
> On 02/28/2011 02:00 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Travis Oliphant
> wrote:
> >> The reason for a NumPy 1.6 suggestion, is that Mark (and others it would
> >> seem) have additional work and features
On 02/28/2011 02:00 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Travis Oliphant
> wrote:
>> The reason for a NumPy 1.6 suggestion, is that Mark (and others it would
>> seem) have additional work and features that do not need to wait for the
>> NumPy 2.0 ABI design to finali
I just want to say that I am looking forward to np.newiter, and I am
impressed at how quickly it's being released.
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
> Mon, 28 Feb 2011 16:50:59 +0800, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Ralf Gommers
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
Mon, 28 Feb 2011 16:50:59 +0800, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
>
>> The other thing that needs to be done is some (more) documentation of
>> new features. Einsum and the new iterator seem to be well documented,
>> but not described in the release not
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
> The other thing that needs to be done is some (more) documentation of
> new features. Einsum and the new iterator seem to be well documented,
> but not described in the release notes.
Hmm, I take that back. Just saw that np.newiter and its m
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> The reason for a NumPy 1.6 suggestion, is that Mark (and others it would
> seem) have additional work and features that do not need to wait for the
> NumPy 2.0 ABI design to finalize in order to get out there.
> If someone is willing t
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Ralf Gommers <
>> ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The PIL test can still be fixed before the final 0.9.0 release, it looks
>>> l
My $0.02 on the NumPy 2.0 schedule:
NumPy 2.0 is for ABI-incompatible changes like datetime support, and .NET
support.It would be ideal, if at the same time we could future-proof the
ABI some-what so that future changes can be made in an ABI-compatible way.
I also think it would be a g
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:36 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>> All tests pass for me now, maybe it's a good time to merge the branch into
>> the trunk so we can run it on the buildbot?
>>
>>
> Might be better to merge your unadulterated stuff into master, make a 1.6
> branch, and add the compatib
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Ralf Gommers > wrote:
>
>>
>> The PIL test can still be fixed before the final 0.9.0 release, it looks
>> like we will need another RC anyway. Does anyone have time for this in the
>> next few days?
>>
>
> I'v
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
>
> The PIL test can still be fixed before the final 0.9.0 release, it looks
> like we will need another RC anyway. Does anyone have time for this in the
> next few days?
>
I've attached a patch which fixes it for me.
> I took a shot at fix
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Charles R Harris <
charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Ralf Gommers <
>> ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Ralf Gommers > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Charles R Harris <
>>> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Charles R Harris <
>> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Travis Oliphant >> > wrote:
>>>
It may make s
On 01/25/2011 10:28 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Charles R Harris
mailto:charlesr.har...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Travis Oliphant
mailto:oliph...@enthought.com>> wrote:
On Jan 25, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> On 01/26/2011 02:05 AM, David wrote:
>> On 01/26/2011 01:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Just thought it was time to start discussing a release schedule for
>>> numpy 2.0 so we have something to aim at. I'm thinki
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Charles R Harris <
> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Travis Oliphant
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> It may make sense for a NumPy 1.6 to come out in March / April in the
>>
On 01/26/2011 02:05 AM, David wrote:
> On 01/26/2011 01:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Just thought it was time to start discussing a release schedule for
>> numpy 2.0 so we have something to aim at. I'm thinking sometime in the
>> period April-June might be appropriate. Ther
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Travis Oliphant
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 25, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>>
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > Just thought it was time to start discussing a release schedule for
>> numpy 2.0 so we
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> On Jan 25, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Just thought it was time to start discussing a release schedule for numpy
> 2.0 so we have something to aim at. I'm thinking sometime in the period
> April-June m
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 6:05 PM, David wrote:
> On 01/26/2011 01:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Just thought it was time to start discussing a release schedule for
> > numpy 2.0 so we have something to aim at. I'm thinking sometime in the
> > period April-June might be appropr
On 01/26/2011 01:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Just thought it was time to start discussing a release schedule for
> numpy 2.0 so we have something to aim at. I'm thinking sometime in the
> period April-June might be appropriate. There is a lot coming with the
> next release: the Ent
On Jan 25, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Just thought it was time to start discussing a release schedule for numpy 2.0
> so we have something to aim at. I'm thinking sometime in the period
> April-June might be appropriate. There is a lot coming with the next release
Hi All,
Just thought it was time to start discussing a release schedule for numpy
2.0 so we have something to aim at. I'm thinking sometime in the period
April-June might be appropriate. There is a lot coming with the next
release: the Enthought's numpy refactoring, Mark's float16 and iterator
wor
26 matches
Mail list logo
