On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> > Alan wrote:
>>> 3. I admit, my students are NOT using non-boolen fancy indexing on
>>> >multidimensional arrays. (As far as I know.) Are yours?
The only confusing case is mixing slices and integer array indexing
for ndim > 2. The rest loo
> Alan wrote:
>> 3. I admit, my students are NOT using non-boolen fancy indexing on
>> >multidimensional arrays. (As far as I know.) Are yours?
On 4/9/2015 2:22 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> Well, okay, this would explain it, since integer fancy indexing is
> exactly the confusing case:-) On th
On 4/9/2015 1:57 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> Do you think there's anything we could be
> doing to reduce this kind of adrenaline reaction while still allowing
> for relaxed discussion about out-there ideas?
numpy3...@scipy.org
:-)
___
NumPy-Discussion
On Do, 2015-04-09 at 02:22 -0400, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> > 1. I use numpy in teaching.
> > I have never heard a complaint about its indexing behavior.
> > Have you heard such complaints?
>
> Some observations:
>
> 1) There's an unrelated th
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> 1. I use numpy in teaching.
> I have never heard a complaint about its indexing behavior.
> Have you heard such complaints?
Some observations:
1) There's an unrelated thread on numpy-discussion right now in which
a user is baffled by the inte
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> That analogy fails because it suggests a private conversation. This list is
> extremely public.
> For example, I am just a user, and I am on it. I can tell you that as a
> long-time numpy user
> my reaction to the proposal to change indexing
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
>
> > To address in detail the list of Matthew you mention above:
> >
> > * implement orthogonal indexing as a method arr.sensible_index[...]
> > That's basically Jaime's PR.
> >
> > *
Trying to bring the meta back into this thread (sorry for Robert's PB :)...
The only thing I'd like to add, is that it's perhaps worth messaging that:
a PR is just (as the Github folks like to say) "a conversation based on
code". It is NOT necessarily something intended explicitly for merging.
In
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> To address in detail the list of Matthew you mention above:
>
> * implement orthogonal indexing as a method arr.sensible_index[...]
> That's basically Jaime's PR.
>
> * implement the current non-boolean fancy indexing behavior as a method
On 2015/04/08 10:02 AM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> 3. I admit, my students are NOT using non-boolen fancy indexing on
> multidimensional arrays. (As far as I know.) Are yours?
Yes, one attempted to, essentially by accident. That was in my original
message. Please refer back to that. The earlier p
1. I use numpy in teaching.
I have never heard a complaint about its indexing behavior.
Have you heard such complaints?
2. One reason I use numpy in teaching is its indexing behavior.
What specific language provides a better indexing model,
in your opinion?
3. I admit, my students are NOT using n
On 2015/04/08 9:40 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> Their proposal is not being discussed; instead that potentially useful
> discussion is being completely derailed by insisting on wanting to talk
> about changes to numpy's indexing behavior.
Good point. That was an unintended consequence of my message.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 9:05 PM, Eric Firing wrote:
> On 2015/04/08 8:09 AM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> > That analogy fails because it suggests a private conversation. This list
> is extremely public.
> > For example, I am just a user, and I am on it. I can tell you that as a
> long-time numpy user
>
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Eric Firing wrote:
> Now, can we please get back to consideration of reasonable options?
Sure, but I recommend going back to the actually topical thread (or a new
one), as this one is meta.
--
Robert Kern
___
NumPy-Disc
On 2015/04/08 8:09 AM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> That analogy fails because it suggests a private conversation. This list is
> extremely public.
> For example, I am just a user, and I am on it. I can tell you that as a
> long-time numpy user
> my reaction to the proposal to change indexing semantics
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 2:06 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 5, 2015 7:04 AM, "Robert Kern" wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Apr 4, 2015 4:12 AM, "Todd" wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >
That analogy fails because it suggests a private conversation. This list is
extremely public.
For example, I am just a user, and I am on it. I can tell you that as a
long-time numpy user
my reaction to the proposal to change indexing semantics was (i) OMG YMBFKM and
then
(ii) take a breath; thi
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 2:06 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>
> On Apr 5, 2015 7:04 AM, "Robert Kern" wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > On Apr 4, 2015 4:12 AM, "Todd" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > There was no break as large as this. In fact I would say this
On Apr 5, 2015 7:04 AM, "Robert Kern" wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> >
> > On Apr 4, 2015 4:12 AM, "Todd" wrote:
> > >
> > > There was no break as large as this. In fact I would say this is even
a larger change than any individual change we saw in the python
19 matches
Mail list logo
