On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> I thought I'd raise this topic just to get some ideas out there. At the >> moment I see two areas that I'd like to see addressed. >> >> >> 1. Documentation editor. This would involve looking at the generated >> documentation and it's organization/coverage as well such things as style >> and maybe reviewing stuff on the documentation site. This would be more >> technical writing than coding. >> 2. Test coverage. There are a lot of areas of numpy that are not well >> tested as well as some tests that are still doc tests and should probably >> be updated. This is a substantial amount of work and would require some >> familiarity with numpy as well as a willingness to ping developers for >> clarification of some topics. >> >> Thoughts? >> > First thought: very useful, but probably not GSOC topics by themselves. > > For a very good student, I'd think topics like implementing NA bit masks > or improved user-defined dtypes would be interesting. In SciPy there's also > a lot to do, and that's probably a better project for students who prefer > to work in Python. > > Good points. There is actually a fair bit of work that could go into NA. The low level infrastructure seems to me somewhat independent of the arguments about the API. I see four areas there 1) Size - that requires bit masks and a decision that masks only take two values. 2) Speed - that requires support in the ufunc loops. 3) Functions - isna needs some help, like isanyna(a, axis=1) 4) More support in current functions. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
