Re: [Numpy-discussion] Improve Numpy Datetime Functionality for Gsoc
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:50 AM, Stephan Hoyer sho...@gmail.com wrote: The most recent discussion about datetime64 was back in March and April of last year: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2014-March/thread.html#69554 http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2014-April/thread.html#69774 In addition to unfortunate timezone handling, datetime64 has a lot of bugs -- so many that I don't bother reporting them. But if anyone ever plans on working on them, I can certainly help to assemble a long list of the issues (many of these are mentioned in the above threads). Unfortunately, though I would love to see datetime64 fixed, I'm not really a suitable mentor for this role (I don't know C), Hi Stephan, thanks for at least considering to mentor. It's always possible to help out as a secondary mentor - even if you don't know C, you could provide valuable feedback because unlike most numpy devs you're actually *using* datetime64. Cheers, Ralf ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Improve Numpy Datetime Functionality for Gsoc
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:00 AM, SMRUTI RANJAN SAHOO c99.smr...@gmail.com wrote: you are saying that if i will find out this bugs ,then i will selected for gsoc 2015 ?? and where i will find my mentor?? No, that's not what I'm saying. Submitting a patch is a requirement from the Python Software Foundation (which is the umbrella org under which we are participating in GSOC) as explained on https://wiki.python.org/moin/SummerOfCode/2015 and on https://github.com/scipy/scipy/wiki/GSoC-project-ideas Regarding mentoring: we have currently 5 mentors signed up in Melange, and will be able to find topic-specific ones if needed. Given that the last couple of years we received 2 slots, we will be able to provide a mentor. It's just not yet clear which one, because we have several mentors who could mentor a number of proposed projects. Cheers, Ralf On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Saprative and Smruti, Sorry for the slow reply, I overlooked this thread. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/53805 and the discussion that followed (also linked from the ideas page) should give you some idea of what is required. If you want to start working on a patch I recommend to start small: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22Easy+Fix%22 There are also a number of related issues that you could look at: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+datetime. Trying to tackly one of those should give you an idea of the level of difficulty of this project (it's one of the harder ones on our list). Cheers, Ralf On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:15 AM, SMRUTI RANJAN SAHOO c99.smr...@gmail.com wrote: i am also student developer. if i will get anything i will tell you. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Saprative Jana saprativej...@gmail.com wrote: hi, I am Saprative .I am new to numpy devlopment. I want to work on the project of improving datetime functionality numpy project .I want to solve some related bugs and get started with the basics. As there is no irc channel for numpy so i am facing a problem of contacting with the mentors moreover there is no mentors mentioned for this project. So anybody who can help me out please contact with me. from, Saprative Jana (Mob: +919477325233) ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Improve Numpy Datetime Functionality for Gsoc
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:17 PM, SMRUTI RANJAN SAHOO c99.smr...@gmail.com wrote: so may i know the links for mentor ,so that i can talk with them more ?? can you provide me the links please ??? Hi Smruti, there are no links. I am one of the mentors, the other mentors are all reading this list. You'll get the most feedback on this list, so please ask relevant technical questions here. If you have further questions on administrative questions that you prefer to not post in public, you can email me privately. Cheers, Ralf On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:50 AM, Stephan Hoyer sho...@gmail.com wrote: The most recent discussion about datetime64 was back in March and April of last year: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2014-March/thread.html#69554 http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2014-April/thread.html#69774 In addition to unfortunate timezone handling, datetime64 has a lot of bugs -- so many that I don't bother reporting them. But if anyone ever plans on working on them, I can certainly help to assemble a long list of the issues (many of these are mentioned in the above threads). Unfortunately, though I would love to see datetime64 fixed, I'm not really a suitable mentor for this role (I don't know C), Hi Stephan, thanks for at least considering to mentor. It's always possible to help out as a secondary mentor - even if you don't know C, you could provide valuable feedback because unlike most numpy devs you're actually *using* datetime64. Cheers, Ralf ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
[Numpy-discussion] Do you find this behavior surprising?
import numpy as np a = np.arange(10) flags = a.flags flags C_CONTIGUOUS : True F_CONTIGUOUS : True OWNDATA : True WRITEABLE : True ALIGNED : True UPDATEIFCOPY : False flags.writeable = False a.flags C_CONTIGUOUS : True F_CONTIGUOUS : True OWNDATA : True WRITEABLE : False --- WTF!!?? ALIGNED : True UPDATEIFCOPY : False I understand why this is happening, and that there is no other obvious way to make a.flags.writeable = False work than to have the return of a.flags linked to a under the hood. But I don't think this is documented anywhere, and wonder if perhaps it should. Jaime -- (\__/) ( O.o) ( ) Este es Conejo. Copia a Conejo en tu firma y ayúdale en sus planes de dominación mundial. ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Do you find this behavior surprising?
Ah, *that* example is surprising to me. Regardless of whether it is a C int of the PyArrayObject struct or not, the way it is presented at the python code level should make sense. From my perspective, a.flags is a mutable object of some sort. Updating it should act like a mutable object, not some other magical object that doesn't work like anything else in python. Ben Root On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Jaime Fernández del Río jaime.f...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote: I fail to see the wtf. flags = a.flags So, flags at this point is just an alias to a.flags, just like any other variable in python flags.writeable = False would then be equivalent to a.flags.writeable = False. There is nothing numpy-specific here. a.flags is mutable object. This is how Python works. Ben Root Ah, yes indeed. If you think of it that way it does make all the sense in the world. But of course that is not what is actually going on, as flags is a single C int of the PyArrayObject struct, and a.flags is just a proxy built from it, and great coding contortions have to be made to have changes to the proxy rewritten into the owner array. I guess then the surprising behavior is this other one, which was the one I (wrongly) expected intuitively: a = np.arange(10) flags = a.flags a.flags.writeable = False flags C_CONTIGUOUS : True F_CONTIGUOUS : True OWNDATA : True WRITEABLE : True ALIGNED : True UPDATEIFCOPY : False This could be fixed to work properly, although it is probably not worth worrying much. Properties of properties are weird... Jaime ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Do you find this behavior surprising?
I fail to see the wtf. flags = a.flags So, flags at this point is just an alias to a.flags, just like any other variable in python flags.writeable = False would then be equivalent to a.flags.writeable = False. There is nothing numpy-specific here. a.flags is mutable object. This is how Python works. Ben Root On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Jaime Fernández del Río jaime.f...@gmail.com wrote: import numpy as np a = np.arange(10) flags = a.flags flags C_CONTIGUOUS : True F_CONTIGUOUS : True OWNDATA : True WRITEABLE : True ALIGNED : True UPDATEIFCOPY : False flags.writeable = False a.flags C_CONTIGUOUS : True F_CONTIGUOUS : True OWNDATA : True WRITEABLE : False --- WTF!!?? ALIGNED : True UPDATEIFCOPY : False I understand why this is happening, and that there is no other obvious way to make a.flags.writeable = False work than to have the return of a.flags linked to a under the hood. But I don't think this is documented anywhere, and wonder if perhaps it should. Jaime -- (\__/) ( O.o) ( ) Este es Conejo. Copia a Conejo en tu firma y ayúdale en sus planes de dominación mundial. ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Do you find this behavior surprising?
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote: I fail to see the wtf. flags = a.flags So, flags at this point is just an alias to a.flags, just like any other variable in python flags.writeable = False would then be equivalent to a.flags.writeable = False. There is nothing numpy-specific here. a.flags is mutable object. This is how Python works. Ben Root Ah, yes indeed. If you think of it that way it does make all the sense in the world. But of course that is not what is actually going on, as flags is a single C int of the PyArrayObject struct, and a.flags is just a proxy built from it, and great coding contortions have to be made to have changes to the proxy rewritten into the owner array. I guess then the surprising behavior is this other one, which was the one I (wrongly) expected intuitively: a = np.arange(10) flags = a.flags a.flags.writeable = False flags C_CONTIGUOUS : True F_CONTIGUOUS : True OWNDATA : True WRITEABLE : True ALIGNED : True UPDATEIFCOPY : False This could be fixed to work properly, although it is probably not worth worrying much. Properties of properties are weird... Jaime ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Improve Numpy Datetime Functionality for Gsoc
so may i know the links for mentor ,so that i can talk with them more ?? can you provide me the links please ??? On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:50 AM, Stephan Hoyer sho...@gmail.com wrote: The most recent discussion about datetime64 was back in March and April of last year: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2014-March/thread.html#69554 http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2014-April/thread.html#69774 In addition to unfortunate timezone handling, datetime64 has a lot of bugs -- so many that I don't bother reporting them. But if anyone ever plans on working on them, I can certainly help to assemble a long list of the issues (many of these are mentioned in the above threads). Unfortunately, though I would love to see datetime64 fixed, I'm not really a suitable mentor for this role (I don't know C), Hi Stephan, thanks for at least considering to mentor. It's always possible to help out as a secondary mentor - even if you don't know C, you could provide valuable feedback because unlike most numpy devs you're actually *using* datetime64. Cheers, Ralf ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
