Re: [Numpy-discussion] grant proposal for core scientific Python projects (rejected)

[Stephen Waterbury]

P.S.  If anyone wants to continue this discussion at SciPy 2019,
I will be there (on my own nickel!  ;) ...

Steve

On 5/2/19 9:45 PM, Stephen Waterbury wrote:


I am a NASA pythonista (for 20+ years ;), but you can now say you know
yet another person at NASA who has no idea this even exists ... :)
Not only do I not know of that, but I know of NASA policies that make
it very difficult for NASA civil servants to contribute to open source
projects -- quite hypocritical, given the amount of open source
code that NASA (like all other large organizations) depends critically
on, but it's a fact.

Cheers,
Steve Waterbury

(CLEARLY **NOT** SPEAKING IN ANY OFFICIAL CAPACITY FOR NASA OR
THE U.S. GOVERNMENT AS A WHOLE!  Hence the personal email
address. :)

On 5/2/19 9:31 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote:

Sounds like this is a NASA specific thing, in which case, I guess 
someone at NASA would need to step up.


I’m afraid I know no pythonistas at NASA.

But I’ll poke around NOAA to see if there’s anything similar.

-CHB

On Apr 25, 2019, at 1:04 PM, Ralf Gommers <mailto:ralf.gomm...@gmail.com>> wrote:





On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 12:41 PM Ralf Gommers 
mailto:ralf.gomm...@gmail.com>> wrote:




On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:03 PM Joe Harrington
mailto:j...@physics.ucf.edu>> wrote:


3. There's such a thing as a share-in-savings contract at
NASA, in which
you calculate a savings, such as from avoided costs of
licensing IDL or
Matlab, and say you'll develop a replacement for that
product that costs
less, in exchange for a portion of the savings.  These are
rare and few
people know about them, but one presenter to the committee
did discuss
them and thought they'd be appropriate. I've always felt
that we could
get a chunk of change this way, and was surprised to find
that the
approach exists and has a name.  About 3 of 4 people I talk
to at NASA
have no idea this even exists, though, and I haven't pursued
it to its
logical end to see if it's viable.


I've heard of these. Definitely worth looking into.


It seems to be hard to find any information about these 
share-in-savings contracts. The closest thing I found is this: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/06/22/2018-13463/nasa-federal-acquisition-regulation-supplement-removal-of-reference-to-the-shared-savings-policy-and


It is called "Shared Savings" there, and was replaced last year by 
something called "Value Engineering Change Proposal". If anyone can 
comment on whether that's the same thing as Joe meant and whether 
this is worth following up on, that would be very helpful.


Cheers,
Ralf

___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org <mailto:NumPy-Discussion@python.org>
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion


___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion





___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] grant proposal for core scientific Python projects (rejected)

[Stephen Waterbury]

I am a NASA pythonista (for 20+ years ;), but you can now say you know
yet another person at NASA who has no idea this even exists ... :)
Not only do I not know of that, but I know of NASA policies that make
it very difficult for NASA civil servants to contribute to open source
projects -- quite hypocritical, given the amount of open source
code that NASA (like all other large organizations) depends critically
on, but it's a fact.

Cheers,
Steve Waterbury

(CLEARLY **NOT** SPEAKING IN ANY OFFICIAL CAPACITY FOR NASA OR
THE U.S. GOVERNMENT AS A WHOLE!  Hence the personal email
address. :)

On 5/2/19 9:31 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote:

Sounds like this is a NASA specific thing, in which case, I guess 
someone at NASA would need to step up.


I’m afraid I know no pythonistas at NASA.

But I’ll poke around NOAA to see if there’s anything similar.

-CHB

On Apr 25, 2019, at 1:04 PM, Ralf Gommers > wrote:





On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 12:41 PM Ralf Gommers > wrote:




On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 10:03 PM Joe Harrington
mailto:j...@physics.ucf.edu>> wrote:


3. There's such a thing as a share-in-savings contract at
NASA, in which
you calculate a savings, such as from avoided costs of
licensing IDL or
Matlab, and say you'll develop a replacement for that product
that costs
less, in exchange for a portion of the savings.  These are
rare and few
people know about them, but one presenter to the committee
did discuss
them and thought they'd be appropriate. I've always felt that
we could
get a chunk of change this way, and was surprised to find
that the
approach exists and has a name.  About 3 of 4 people I talk
to at NASA
have no idea this even exists, though, and I haven't pursued
it to its
logical end to see if it's viable.


I've heard of these. Definitely worth looking into.


It seems to be hard to find any information about these 
share-in-savings contracts. The closest thing I found is this: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/06/22/2018-13463/nasa-federal-acquisition-regulation-supplement-removal-of-reference-to-the-shared-savings-policy-and


It is called "Shared Savings" there, and was replaced last year by 
something called "Value Engineering Change Proposal". If anyone can 
comment on whether that's the same thing as Joe meant and whether 
this is worth following up on, that would be very helpful.


Cheers,
Ralf

___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion


___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] grant proposal for core scientific Python projects (rejected)

[Stephen Waterbury]

Sure, I would be interested to discuss, let's try to meet up there.

Steve

On 5/3/19 12:23 PM, Chris Barker wrote:

On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 11:51 PM Ralf Gommers <mailto:ralf.gomm...@gmail.com>> wrote:


On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 3:49 AM Stephen Waterbury
mailto:water...@pangalactic.us>> wrote:

P.S.  If anyone wants to continue this discussion at SciPy 2019,
I will be there (on my own nickel!  ;) ...


So will I (on NOAA's nickel, which I am grateful for)

Maybe we should hold a BoF, or even something more formal, on 
Government support for SciPY Stack development?


-CHB
--

Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R            (206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115       (206) 526-6317   main reception

chris.bar...@noaa.gov <mailto:chris.bar...@noaa.gov>

___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] new numpy.org is live

[Stephen Waterbury]

This is an absolutely beautiful and very informative site!
It is clear all the work and thought that went into it.

So please take the following input as a constructive suggestion
from an outsider -- I am a long-time (30-year) Python user, and
I follow this list but do not regularly use NumPy ... so again,
an "outsider" perspective:

I would prefer to see the beautiful "ECOSYSTEM" section as the
top section of the page, since it is kind of a "gateway" to all
kinds of cool links, etc. -- and it is visually very interesting, as well.

The "features" boxes at the top of the page, while very good
information, are not nearly as "useful" and they are static,
so I would even suggest providing access to them via a
"Features" menu item among the very top items
(i.e., with "Installation", etc.).

Very humbly offered, with thanks for all the beautiful work.

Steve


___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

[Numpy-discussion] Re: The source code corresponding to numpy.invert.

[Stephen Waterbury]

On 10/4/21 10:07 AM, Hongyi Zhao wrote:


On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 9:33 PM Robert Kern  wrote:

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 5:17 AM Hongyi Zhao  wrote:



That’s just the way Python’s syntax works. Operators are not names that can be 
resolved to objects that can be compared with the `is` operator. Instead, when 
that operator is evaluated in an expression, the Python interpreter will look 
up a specially-named method on the operand object (in this case `__invert__`). 
Numpy array objects implement this method using `np.invert`.

If so, which is symlink to which, I mean, which is the original name,
and which is an alias?


"symlink" and "alias" are probably not the best analogies. The implementation 
of `np.ndarry.__invert__` simply calls `np.invert` to do the actual computation.

It seems that the above calling/invoking logic/mechanism is not so
clear or easy to understand/figure out only by reading the document,
say, by the following commands in IPython:

import numpy as np
help(np.invert)
np.invert?
np.info(np.invert)


You probably want to read the Python Language Reference regarding 
"Special Methods":


https://docs.python.org/3.9/reference/datamodel.html#special-method-names 



HTH,
Steve


___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/
Member address: arch...@mail-archive.com