Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-03 Thread Charles R Harris
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:59 PM, David Cournapeau >> wrote: >> >>> Anne Archibald wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > First I guess we should check whi

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-01 Thread Charles R Harris
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:16 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:59 PM, David Cournapeau wrote: > >> Anne Archibald wrote: >> >> > >> > First I guess we should check which systems don't have log1p >> >> This is already done - we do use the system log1p on linux (but note >> t

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-01 Thread Charles R Harris
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:59 PM, David Cournapeau wrote: > Anne Archibald wrote: > > > > > First I guess we should check which systems don't have log1p > > This is already done - we do use the system log1p on linux (but note > that log2_1p is not standard AFAIK). I would guess few systems outside >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-01 Thread David Cournapeau
Anne Archibald wrote: > > First I guess we should check which systems don't have log1p This is already done - we do use the system log1p on linux (but note that log2_1p is not standard AFAIK). I would guess few systems outside windows don't have log1p, given that msun has an implementation, D

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-01 Thread Charles R Harris
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Anne Archibald wrote: > On 1 April 2010 13:38, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Anne Archibald > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> On

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-01 Thread Anne Archibald
On 1 April 2010 13:38, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Charles R Harris > wrote: >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Anne Archibald >> wrote: >>> >>> On 1 April 2010 02:24, Charles R Harris >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Anne Ar

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-01 Thread Charles R Harris
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Anne Archibald > wrote: > >> On 1 April 2010 02:24, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Anne Archibald < >> peridot.face...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-01 Thread Charles R Harris
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Anne Archibald wrote: > On 1 April 2010 02:24, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Anne Archibald < > peridot.face...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> On 1 April 2010 01:59, Charles R Harris > wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, Ma

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-01 Thread Charles R Harris
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 3:52 AM, David Cournapeau wrote: > Anne Archibald wrote: > > On 1 April 2010 03:15, David Cournapeau wrote: > >> Anne Archibald wrote: > >> > >>> Particularly given the comments in the boost source code, I'm leery of > >>> this fix; who knows what an optimizing compiler wil

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-01 Thread David Cournapeau
Anne Archibald wrote: > On 1 April 2010 03:15, David Cournapeau wrote: >> Anne Archibald wrote: >> >>> Particularly given the comments in the boost source code, I'm leery of >>> this fix; who knows what an optimizing compiler will do with it? >> But the current code *is* wrong: it is not true that

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-01 Thread Anne Archibald
On 1 April 2010 03:15, David Cournapeau wrote: > Anne Archibald wrote: > >> >> Particularly given the comments in the boost source code, I'm leery of >> this fix; who knows what an optimizing compiler will do with it? > > But the current code *is* wrong: it is not true that u == 1 implies u - > 1

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-04-01 Thread David Cournapeau
Anne Archibald wrote: > > Particularly given the comments in the boost source code, I'm leery of > this fix; who knows what an optimizing compiler will do with it? But the current code *is* wrong: it is not true that u == 1 implies u - 1 == 0 (and that (u-1) != 0 -> u != 1), because the spacing

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Anne Archibald
On 1 April 2010 02:49, David Cournapeau wrote: > Charles R Harris wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Anne Archibald >> wrote: >> >>> On 1 April 2010 01:59, Charles R Harris wrote: On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:46 PM, Anne Archibald < >>> peridot.face...@gmail.com> wrote: >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread David Cournapeau
Charles R Harris wrote: > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Anne Archibald > wrote: > >> On 1 April 2010 01:59, Charles R Harris wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:46 PM, Anne Archibald < >> peridot.face...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: On 1 April 2010 01:40, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Anne Archibald
On 1 April 2010 02:24, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Anne Archibald > wrote: >> >> On 1 April 2010 01:59, Charles R Harris wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:46 PM, Anne Archibald >> > >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On 1 April 2010 01:40, Charles R Harris

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Charles R Harris
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Anne Archibald wrote: > On 1 April 2010 01:59, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:46 PM, Anne Archibald < > peridot.face...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> On 1 April 2010 01:40, Charles R Harris > wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, M

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Anne Archibald
On 1 April 2010 01:59, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:46 PM, Anne Archibald > wrote: >> >> On 1 April 2010 01:40, Charles R Harris wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:25 PM, wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM,   wrote: >> >> > On Thu, Apr 1,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Charles R Harris
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:46 PM, Anne Archibald wrote: > On 1 April 2010 01:40, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:25 PM, wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, wrote: > >> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Charles R Harris > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Anne Archibald
On 1 April 2010 01:40, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:25 PM, wrote: >> >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM,   wrote: >> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Charles R Harris >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:08 PM, wrote: >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, Mar 31,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Charles R Harris
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:25 PM, wrote: > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Charles R Harris > > wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:08 PM, wrote: > >>> > >>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Warren Weckesser > >>> wrote: > >>> > T J wrot

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread josef . pktd
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, wrote: > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Charles R Harris > wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:08 PM, wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Warren Weckesser >>> wrote: >>> > T J wrote: >>> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Charles R Harris >>>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Charles R Harris
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:17 PM, Anne Archibald wrote: > On 1 April 2010 01:11, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Anne Archibald < > peridot.face...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> On 31 March 2010 16:21, Charles R Harris > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > On W

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread josef . pktd
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 1:17 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:08 PM, wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Warren Weckesser >> wrote: >> > T J wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Charles R Harris >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Looks like roundoff error. >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Anne Archibald
On 1 April 2010 01:11, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Anne Archibald > wrote: >> >> On 31 March 2010 16:21, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:38 AM, T J wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:30 AM, T J wrote: >> >> > H

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Charles R Harris
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:08 PM, wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Warren Weckesser > wrote: > > T J wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Charles R Harris > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Looks like roundoff error. > >>> > >>> > >> > >> So this is "expected" behavior? > >> > >> In [1]: np

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Charles R Harris
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Anne Archibald wrote: > On 31 March 2010 16:21, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:38 AM, T J wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:30 AM, T J wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > I'm getting some strange behavior with logaddexp2.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Anne Archibald
On 31 March 2010 16:21, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:38 AM, T J wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:30 AM, T J wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I'm getting some strange behavior with logaddexp2.reduce: >> > >> > from itertools import permutations >> > import numpy as np

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Charles R Harris
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:28 PM, T J wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > > > That is a 32 bit kernel, right? > > > > Correct. > > Regarding the config.h, which config.h? I have a numpyconfig.h. > Which compilation options should I obtain and how? When I run

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread T J
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > That is a 32 bit kernel, right? > Correct. Regarding the config.h, which config.h? I have a numpyconfig.h. Which compilation options should I obtain and how? When I run setup.py, I see: C compiler: gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Charles R Harris
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:42 PM, T J wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > >> So this is "expected" behavior? > >> > >> In [1]: np.logaddexp2(-1.5849625007211563, -53.584962500721154) > >> Out[1]: -1.5849625007211561 > >> > >> In [2]: np.logaddexp2(-0.584962500721

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread David Cournapeau
Ryan May wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Warren Weckesser > wrote: >> T J wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Charles R Harris >>> wrote: >>> Looks like roundoff error. >>> So this is "expected" behavior? >>> >>> In [1]: np.logaddexp2(-1.5849625007211563, -53.5849

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Ryan May
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Warren Weckesser wrote: > T J wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> >>> Looks like roundoff error. >>> >>> >> >> So this is "expected" behavior? >> >> In [1]: np.logaddexp2(-1.5849625007211563, -53.584962500721154) >> Out[1]: -1.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread josef . pktd
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Warren Weckesser wrote: > T J wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> >>> Looks like roundoff error. >>> >>> >> >> So this is "expected" behavior? >> >> In [1]: np.logaddexp2(-1.5849625007211563, -53.584962500721154) >> Out[1]: -1.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Warren Weckesser
T J wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > >> Looks like roundoff error. >> >> > > So this is "expected" behavior? > > In [1]: np.logaddexp2(-1.5849625007211563, -53.584962500721154) > Out[1]: -1.5849625007211561 > > In [2]: np.logaddexp2(-0.5849625007211563,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread T J
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 3:38 PM, David Warde-Farley wrote: > Unfortunately there's no good way of getting around order-of- > operations-related rounding error using the reduce() machinery, that I > know of. > That seems reasonable, but receiving a nan, in this case, does not. Are my expectations

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread T J
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: >> So this is "expected" behavior? >> >> In [1]: np.logaddexp2(-1.5849625007211563, -53.584962500721154) >> Out[1]: -1.5849625007211561 >> >> In [2]: np.logaddexp2(-0.5849625007211563, -53.584962500721154) >> Out[2]: nan >> > I don't see tha

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread David Warde-Farley
On 31-Mar-10, at 6:15 PM, T J wrote: > > In [1]: np.logaddexp2(-1.5849625007211563, -53.584962500721154) > Out[1]: -1.5849625007211561 > > In [2]: np.logaddexp2(-0.5849625007211563, -53.584962500721154) > Out[2]: nan > > In [3]: np.log2(np.exp2(-0.5849625007211563) + > np.exp2(-53.5849625007211

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Charles R Harris
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:15 PM, T J wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > > > Looks like roundoff error. > > > > So this is "expected" behavior? > > In [1]: np.logaddexp2(-1.5849625007211563, -53.584962500721154) > Out[1]: -1.5849625007211561 > > In [2]: np.log

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread T J
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > Looks like roundoff error. > So this is "expected" behavior? In [1]: np.logaddexp2(-1.5849625007211563, -53.584962500721154) Out[1]: -1.5849625007211561 In [2]: np.logaddexp2(-0.5849625007211563, -53.584962500721154) Out[2]: nan In [

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread Charles R Harris
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:38 AM, T J wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:30 AM, T J wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm getting some strange behavior with logaddexp2.reduce: > > > > from itertools import permutations > > import numpy as np > > x = np.array([-53.584962500721154, -1.5849625007211563, > -0

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread T J
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:30 AM, T J wrote: > Hi, > > I'm getting some strange behavior with logaddexp2.reduce: > > from itertools import permutations > import numpy as np > x = np.array([-53.584962500721154, -1.5849625007211563, -0.5849625007211563]) > for p in permutations([0,1,2]): >    print

[Numpy-discussion] Bug in logaddexp2.reduce

2010-03-31 Thread T J
Hi, I'm getting some strange behavior with logaddexp2.reduce: from itertools import permutations import numpy as np x = np.array([-53.584962500721154, -1.5849625007211563, -0.5849625007211563]) for p in permutations([0,1,2]): print p, np.logaddexp2.reduce(x[list(p)]) Essentially, the result