Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-12 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote: Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, and once you make a function work for datetime it would also work for other new dtypes. But my impression

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-10 Thread Bruce Southey
On 06/10/2011 09:18 AM, Mark Wiebe wrote: On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com mailto:ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com mailto:mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-10 Thread Mark Wiebe
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Bruce Southey bsout...@gmail.com wrote: ** snip I have following the multiple date/time discussions with some interest as it is clear there is not 'one way' (perhaps it's Dutch). But, I do keep coming back to Chris's concepts of time as a strict unit of

[Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Mark Wiebe
I've replaced the previous two pull requests with a single pull request rolling up all the changes so far. The newest changes include finishing the generic unit and np.arange function support. https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/87 Because of the nature of datetime and timedelta, arange has to

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Christopher Barker
Mark Wiebe wrote: Because of the nature of datetime and timedelta, arange has to be slightly different than with all the other types. In particular, for datetime the primary signature is np.arange(datetime, datetime, timedelta). I've implemented a simple extension which allows for another

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Mark Wiebe
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Christopher Barker chris.bar...@noaa.gov wrote: Mark Wiebe wrote: Because of the nature of datetime and timedelta, arange has to be slightly different than with all the other types. In particular, for datetime the primary signature is np.arange(datetime,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Christopher Barker chris.bar...@noaa.gov wrote: Your branch works fine for me (OS X, py2.6), no failures. Only a few deprecation warnings like:

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Robert Kern
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 15:01, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: I've replaced the previous two pull requests with a single pull request rolling up all the changes so far. The newest changes include finishing the generic unit and np.arange function support.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Mark Wiebe
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@googlemail.comwrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Christopher Barker chris.bar...@noaa.gov wrote: Your branch works fine for me (OS X, py2.6), no failures.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Charles R Harris
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 15:01, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: I've replaced the previous two pull requests with a single pull request rolling up all the changes so far. The newest changes include finishing the

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@googlemail.comwrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Christopher Barker

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Robert Kern
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 16:27, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 15:01, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: I've replaced the previous two pull requests with a single pull request rolling up all the changes so far. The newest changes include finishing the generic

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Mark Wiebe
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 16:27, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 15:01, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: I've replaced the previous two pull requests with a single pull request rolling

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Mark Wiebe
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@googlemail.comwrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Mark Wiebe

Re: [Numpy-discussion] code review for datetime arange

2011-06-09 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@googlemail.comwrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Ralf Gommers