Pete Forman wrote:
> Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Colin J. Williams wrote:
>>> I'm not sure that scipy has been updated to Python 2.5
> > ? scipy certainly works with 2.5. Are you referring to something
> > else perhaps?
>
> Yes, the Python Enthought Edition was being discusse
Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Colin J. Williams wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure that scipy has been updated to Python 2.5
>
> ? scipy certainly works with 2.5. Are you referring to something
> else perhaps?
Yes, the Python Enthought Edition was being discussed and it is
currently based on
On Apr 20, 2007, at 3:49 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
> Tommy Grav wrote:
>> On Apr 20, 2007, at 2:44 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
>>> Colin J. Williams wrote:
>>>
I'm not sure that scipy has been updated to Python 2.5
>>> ? scipy certainly works with 2.5. Are you referring to something
>>> else perhaps?
Tommy Grav wrote:
> On Apr 20, 2007, at 2:44 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
>> Colin J. Williams wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure that scipy has been updated to Python 2.5
>> ? scipy certainly works with 2.5. Are you referring to something
>> else perhaps?
>
> A side question: Is there any plans of updating t
On Apr 20, 2007, at 2:44 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
> Colin J. Williams wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure that scipy has been updated to Python 2.5
>
> ? scipy certainly works with 2.5. Are you referring to something
> else perhaps?
A side question: Is there any plans of updating the scipy.org
Superpack bu
Colin J. Williams wrote:
> I'm not sure that scipy has been updated to Python 2.5
? scipy certainly works with 2.5. Are you referring to something else perhaps?
--
Robert Kern
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad att
orangeDinosaur wrote:
> OK, I'll go with the enthought installation. This seems to be the
> path of least resistance. For those of you who have been in my
> position, is there a reason NOT to go with the enthought installation
> and do things piecemeal instead?
>
> thanks,
> trevis
>
> On Apr 2
OK, I'll go with the enthought installation. This seems to be the
path of least resistance. For those of you who have been in my
position, is there a reason NOT to go with the enthought installation
and do things piecemeal instead?
thanks,
trevis
On Apr 20, 11:36 am, Pete Forman <[EMAIL PROTECT
orangeDinosaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [...] But now, the figure window is completely unresponsive -- I
> can't even close it without getting the "your program is not
> repsonding" business. What am I missing? This behavior so far
> seems pretty unintuitive.
The best way out of this i
orangeDinosaur wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am exploring the possibility of using python as a replacement of
> MATLAB when I leave school. So, I've been playing with matplotlib and
> have run into some weird behavior after recently installing python
> 2.5.1 and matplotlib 0.90 on my Windows XP machine. Her
On 19 Apr 2007 16:13:43 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So, first off, what's up with the [ > at 0x017C38C8>] line that shows up after my plot command? And second,
> > when I call show(), a new figure pops up with my sin wave -- seems all
> > right, yes? But I'm not given
> So, first off, what's up with the [ at 0x017C38C8>] line that shows up after my plot command? And second,
> when I call show(), a new figure pops up with my sin wave -- seems all
> right, yes? But I'm not given another >>> prompt in IDLE until or
> unless I close the figure that popped up with
12 matches
Mail list logo
