1:00 :
>>> > Message: 2
>>> > Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 21:24:00 -0800
>>> > From: Jaime Fern?ndez del R?o
>>> > Subject: [Numpy-discussion] Sorting refactor
>>> > To: Discussion of Numerical Python
>>> > Message-ID:
>>> &
Jaime Fern?ndez del R?o
>> > Subject: [Numpy-discussion] Sorting refactor
>> > To: Discussion of Numerical Python
>> > Message-ID:
>> > <
>> capowhwkf6rnwcrgmcwsmq_lo3hshjgbvlsrn19z-mdpe25e...@mail.gmail.com>
>> > Content-Type: text/
> >
> > The data parallel constructs tend to crash the compiler, but task
> > spawning seems to be stable in 4.9.2. I've still to see how it handles
> > multiprocessing/fork.
> >
> > What do you mean by will be in 5.0, did they do a big push?
>
> gcc 5.0 cha
On 01/16/2015 03:14 PM, Lars Buitinck wrote:
> 2015-01-16 13:29 GMT+01:00 :
>> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 12:43:43 +0100
>> From: Julian Taylor
>> Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] Sorting refactor
>> To: Discussion of Numerical Python
>> Message-ID: <54b8f96f.709
2015-01-16 15:14 GMT+01:00 :
> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 06:11:29 -0800
> From: Jaime Fern?ndez del R?o
> Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] Sorting refactor
> To: Discussion of Numerical Python
>
> Most of my proposed original changes do not affect the core sorting
> fu
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Lars Buitinck wrote:
> 2015-01-16 11:55 GMT+01:00 :
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 21:24:00 -0800
> > From: Jaime Fern?ndez del R?o
> > Subject: [Numpy-discussion] Sorting refactor
> > To: Discussion of
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 4:19 AM, Matthew Brett
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 5:24 AM, Jaime Fernández del Río
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have been taking a deep look at the sorting functionality in numpy,
> and I
> > think it could use a face lift in the form of a big code refacto
On 16 January 2015 at 13:15, Eelco Hoogendoorn
wrote:
> Perhaps an algorithm can be made faster, but often these multicore
> algorithms are also less efficient, and a less data-dependent way of putting
> my cores to good use would have been preferable. Potentially, other code
> could slow down due
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 5:24 AM, Jaime Fernández del Río
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have been taking a deep look at the sorting functionality in numpy, and I
> think it could use a face lift in the form of a big code refactor, to get
> rid of some of the ugliness in the code and make it easier to
gt; From: Jaime Fern?ndez del R?o
> >> Subject: [Numpy-discussion] Sorting refactor
> >> To: Discussion of Numerical Python
> >> Message-ID:
> >> <
> capowhwkf6rnwcrgmcwsmq_lo3hshjgbvlsrn19z-mdpe25e...@mail.gmail.com>
> >> Content-Type: t
On 16.01.2015 12:33, Lars Buitinck wrote:
> 2015-01-16 11:55 GMT+01:00 :
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 21:24:00 -0800
>> From: Jaime Fern?ndez del R?o
>> Subject: [Numpy-discussion] Sorting refactor
>> To: Discussion of Numerical Python
>> Messag
2015-01-16 11:55 GMT+01:00 :
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 21:24:00 -0800
> From: Jaime Fern?ndez del R?o
> Subject: [Numpy-discussion] Sorting refactor
> To: Discussion of Numerical Python
> Message-ID:
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-
Hi all,
I have been taking a deep look at the sorting functionality in numpy, and I
think it could use a face lift in the form of a big code refactor, to get
rid of some of the ugliness in the code and make it easier to maintain.
What I have in mind basically amounts to:
1. Refactor _new_argso
13 matches
Mail list logo
