The idea of a one-byte string dtype has been extensively discussed twice
before, with a lot of good input and ideas, but no action [1, 2].
tl;dr: Perfect is the enemy of good. Can numpy just add a one-byte string
dtype named 's' that uses latin-1 encoding as a bridge to enable Python 3
usage in
On 22/02/15 19:21, Aldcroft, Thomas wrote:
Problems like this are now showing up in the wild [3]. Workarounds are
also showing up, like a way to easily convert from 'S' to 'U' within
astropy Tables [4], but this is really not a desirable way to go.
Gigabyte-sized string data arrays are not
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Sturla Molden sturla.mol...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22/02/15 19:21, Aldcroft, Thomas wrote:
Problems like this are now showing up in the wild [3]. Workarounds are
also showing up, like a way to easily convert from 'S' to 'U' within
astropy Tables [4], but this
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Sturla Molden sturla.mol...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 22/02/15 19:21, Aldcroft, Thomas wrote:
Problems like this are now showing up in the wild [3]. Workarounds are
also showing up, like a way to easily convert from 'S' to 'U' within
astropy Tables [4], but
On 22/02/15 21:04, Robert Kern wrote:
Python 3's `str` type is opaque, so it can
freely choose how to represent the data in memory. numpy dtypes
transparently describe how the data is represented in memory.
Hm, yes, that is a good point.
Sturla
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Aldcroft, Thomas
aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Aldcroft,
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 5:56 PM, Aldcroft, Thomas
aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Aldcroft, Thomas
aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at
On Feb 22, 2015 3:39 PM, Aldcroft, Thomas aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu
wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 5:56 PM, Aldcroft, Thomas
aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 3:40 PM,
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Aldcroft, Thomas
aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu wrote:
The idea of a one-byte string dtype has been extensively discussed twice
before, with a lot of good input and ideas, but no action
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Aldcroft, Thomas
aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Aldcroft, Thomas
aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu wrote:
The idea of a one-byte string dtype has
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Aldcroft, Thomas
aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu wrote:
The idea of a one-byte string dtype has been
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Aldcroft, Thomas
aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu wrote:
The idea of a one-byte string dtype has been extensively discussed twice
before, with a lot of good input and ideas, but no action [1, 2].
tl;dr: Perfect is the enemy of good. Can numpy just add a one-byte
On 22/02/15 20:57, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
This is a discussion about how strings are represented as bit-patterns
inside ndarrays; the internal storage representation used by 'str' is
irrelevant.
I thought it would be clever to just use the same internal
representation as Python would choose.
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Aldcroft, Thomas
aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu wrote:
The idea of a one-byte string dtype has been extensively discussed twice
before, with a lot of good input and ideas, but no action
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Aldcroft, Thomas
aldcr...@head.cfa.harvard.edu wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Aldcroft,
This was raised in SO today:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/28663142/why-is-np-wheres-result-read-only-for-multi-dimensional-arrays/28664009
np.nonzero (and np.where for boolean arrays) behave differently for 1-D and
higher dimensional arrays:
In the first case, a tuple with a single
16 matches
Mail list logo
