Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adoption of a Code of Conduct

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Stefan van der Walt wrote: > Hi everyone, > > A while ago, SciPy (the library) adopted its Code of Conduct: > https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/dev/conduct/ > code_of_conduct.html > > We worked hard to make that document friendly, while at the same time >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] backwards compatibility and deprecation policy NEP

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM, Stephan Hoyer wrote: > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 5:38 PM Ralf Gommers > wrote: > >> This is very developer-centric view. We have lots of users and also lots >> of no-longer-active contributors. The needs, interests and previous work >> put into NumPy of those grou

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adoption of a Code of Conduct

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:12 AM, Nathan Goldbaum > wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Ralf Gommers >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Nathan Goldbaum >>> wrote: >>> I realize this was probably b

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adoption of a Code of Conduct

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Robert Kern wrote: > On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 8:35 PM Ryan May wrote: > >> When experts say that something is a bad idea, and when the people who >>> a CoC is supposed to protect says it makes them feel unsafe, I feel >>> like we should listen to that. >>> >>> I al

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adoption of a Code of Conduct

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 3:04 AM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Stefan van der Walt > wrote: > > On August 3, 2018 09:50:38 Robert Kern wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 11:01 PM Robert Kern > wrote: > >>> > >>> Nope, concision is definitely not my strengt

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adoption of a Code of Conduct

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 1:45 PM, Peter Creasey wrote: > +1 for keeping the same CoC as Scipy, making a new thing just seems a > bigger surface area to maintain. Personally I already assumed Scipy's > "honour[ing] diversity in..." did not imply any protection of > behaviours that violate the CoC *i

[Numpy-discussion] pytest, fixture and parametrize

Hi All, I'm writing some tests and would like to come to a common understanding as to whether we are should use pytest fixtures and parametrized classes and functions. The immediate problem is testing over all types that should be supported, which something we should to much more of and is most ea

[Numpy-discussion] Stacklevel for warnings.

Hi All, Do we have a policy for the stacklevel that should be used in NumPy? How far back should the stack be displayed? I note that the optimum stacklevel may vary between users and developers. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@p

[Numpy-discussion] Does numpy need a *.dist-info directory? What is the status of setuptools?

Hi All, A question for any packaging gurus out there, should NumPy have a *.dist-info directory? I note that currently we have a *.egg-info directory. I also have a question as to what role setuptools should have going forward. Should we still rely on th

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Does numpy need a *.dist-info directory? What is the status of setuptools?

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 1:13 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> A question for any packaging gurus out there, should NumPy have a >> *.dist-i

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adoption of a Code of Conduct

On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 10:30 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 1:02 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 1:45 PM, Peter Creasey < >> p.e.creasey...@googlemail.com>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal to accept NEP-18, __array_function__ protocol

On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:25 AM, Matthew Brett wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks Nathaniel for this thoughtful response. > > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 10:44 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > ... > > The other approach would be to incrementally add clean, well-defined > > dunder methods like __array_ufunc__, __a

[Numpy-discussion] The http://planet.scipy.org/ site is down.

Hi All, Anyone know who hosts http://planet.scipy.org/? Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.15.1 release

Hi All, The NumPy 1.15.1 release is ready to go, the release notes may be reviewed at gh-11787 . Pending comments, I will make the release next Tuesday. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal to accept NEP-18, __array_function__ protocol

Ping to finish up this discussion so we can come to a conclusion. I'm in favor of the NEP, as I don't see it as orthogonal to Nathaniel's concerns. However, we might want to be selective as to which functions we expose via the `__array_function__` method. On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Stephan

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.15.1 released.

Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team, I am pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.15.1. This is a bugfix release for bugs and regressions reported following the 1.15.0 release. Noticeable fixes are - The annoying but harmless RuntimeWarning that "numpy.dtype size changed" has been suppr

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Possible Deprecation of np.ediff1d

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:37 AM Robert Kern wrote: > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 10:30 AM Tyler Reddy > wrote: > >> Chuck suggested ( >> https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/11805#issuecomment-416069436 ) that >> we may want to consider deprecating np.ediff1d, which is perhaps not much >> more usefu

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Possible Deprecation of np.ediff1d

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 8:05 PM Stephan Hoyer wrote: > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 10:30 AM Tyler Reddy > wrote: > >> Chuck suggested ( >> https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/11805#issuecomment-416069436 ) that >> we may want to consider deprecating np.ediff1d, which is perhaps not much >> more usef

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal to accept NEP-18, __array_function__ protocol

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:27 PM Stephan Hoyer wrote: > I propose to accept NEP-18, "A dispatch mechanism for NumPy’s high level > array functions": > http://www.numpy.org/neps/nep-0018-array-function-protocol.html > > Since the last round of discussion, we added a new section on "Callable > object

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal to accept NEP-18, __array_function__ protocol

On Sun, Sep 2, 2018 at 12:58 PM Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:27 PM Stephan Hoyer wrote: > >> I propose to accept NEP-18, "A dispatch mechanism for NumPy’s high level >> array functions": >> http://www.numpy.org/neps/nep-0018-arra

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Problem with libgfortran installed with pip install numpy

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 5:38 PM David Grote wrote: > > Hi - I have recently come across this problem. On my mac, I build a > Fortran code, producing a shared object, that I import into Python along > with numpy. This had been working fine until recently when I started seeing > sag faults deep insi

Re: [Numpy-discussion] A minor milestone

On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 2:31 AM Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 1:19 AM, Hans Dembinski > wrote: > > > >> On 7. Sep 2018, at 06:33, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> > >> Looking at https://pypistats.org/packages/numpy , it appears that > >> August 24 was the last day when numpy had mo

[Numpy-discussion] C99

Hi All, I've a PR up converting travis testing to use C99 . I suspect we may not want to merge it for a while, but it does raise a couple of style questions that we should probably settle up front. Namely: - Should we allow // style comments - Sho

Re: [Numpy-discussion] C99

On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:02 AM Eric Wieser wrote: > Thanks for the first step on this! > > Should we allow // style comments > > I don’t think it matters too much. I think it might be a little messy to > have a mix of the two styles where // means “post py3” and /* */ means > pre-py3 - but at th

Re: [Numpy-discussion] A minor milestone

niel Smith wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 6:33 PM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> > Thanks for the link. It would be nice to improve the Windows numbers, >> Linux >> > is still very dominant. I suppose that might be an artifact of the >> systems >&g

Re: [Numpy-discussion] A minor milestone

On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:03 PM Chris Barker wrote: > There are probably a LOT of Windows users getting numpy from conda as well. > > (I know my CI's and users do...) > > It'd be nice if there was some way to track real usage! > I wonder if the conda folks have some statistics? Chuck

Re: [Numpy-discussion] C99

On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 11:02 AM Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 6:07 AM Charles R Harris > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:02 AM Eric Wieser >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks for the first step on this! >>>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposal to accept NEP-18, __array_function__ protocol

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:27 PM Stephan Hoyer wrote: > I propose to accept NEP-18, "A dispatch mechanism for NumPy’s high level > array functions": > http://www.numpy.org/neps/nep-0018-array-function-protocol.html > > Since the last round of discussion, we added a new section on "Callable > object

[Numpy-discussion] CI Testing

Hi All, We might want to take a look at testing/building on AZURE . Probably worth exploring, although it is hard to find all information. IIRC, we got an offer from Microsoft along these lines a couple of y

Re: [Numpy-discussion] CI Testing

aged build workers > to the same system, but the build agent is written in C#, so I'm not sure > how portable it is to ARM or PPC yet. > Did you sign up as open source? And if so, were you able to do so as an organization? > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 7:02 PM, Charles R H

Re: [Numpy-discussion] CI Testing

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 7:30 PM Stanley Seibert wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 7:32 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 6:26 PM Stanley Seibert >> wrote: >> >>> If you

Re: [Numpy-discussion] CI Testing

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 7:30 PM Stanley Seibert wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 7:32 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 6:26 PM Stanley Seibert >> wrote: >> >>> If you

Re: [Numpy-discussion] CI Testing

I opted for. >> > Does Azure Pipeline respond to the Github hooks? We have hooks for all the other testing sites. Thanks for the continuing updates, you are one of the first explorers and anything you can report back is of great help to the rest of us. >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 8:13

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.15.2

Hi All, I'm planning to make a NumPy 1.15.2 release this coming weekend in order to deal with a couple of bugs. The fixes queued up for the release can be seen here . If you think that there should be addition

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.15.2 released

Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team, I am pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.15.2. This is a bug fix release for bugs and regressions reported following the 1.15.2 release. The fixes are: - the matrix PendingDeprecationWarning is now suppressed in pytest 3.8, - the new cached alloca

[Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.14.6 release

Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team, I am pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.14.6. This is a bug fix release for bugs and regressions reported following the 1.14.5 release. The significant fixes are: - Fix for behavior change in ``ma.masked_values(shrink=True)`` - Fix the new cached

[Numpy-discussion] PR Cleanup

Hi All, As usual, the top of the PR stack is getting all the attention. As a start on cleaning up the old PRs, I'd like to suggest that all the maintainers look at their (long) pending PRs and decide which they want to keep, close those they don't want to pursue, and rebase the others. Might also

Re: [Numpy-discussion] PR Cleanup

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:08 AM Robert Kern wrote: > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 9:59 AM Stefan van der Walt > wrote: > >> PR 4808 [0] asks whether `np.pad` should have a default mode. The >> proposal is to make the defaul `constant`, with a value of 0. This is >> common in many signal processing

Re: [Numpy-discussion] PR Cleanup

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 6:09 PM Matthew Harrigan wrote: > PR 8528 adds logical gufuncs > such as " all equal". The functionality has been mentioned quite a few > times on this list. Many implementations are in the PR and they are decent > IMHO. The har

[Numpy-discussion] Deactivated appveyor

Hi All, This is just to notify everyone making PRs on github that I have deactivated the appeveyor webhook now that azure testing seems to be working for the windows tests. Azure is much faster and I expect that travis or one of the other platforms will become the testing bottleneck. I think the n

[Numpy-discussion] Plans for 1.15.3 release, 1.16.x branch

Hi All, I'm planning to do a 1.15.3 release in about two weeks, if there are fixes or regressions that you feel have slipped by without getting marked for backport, please comment. I'm planning on branching 1.16.x in mid November, which should provide enough time for 1-2 release candidates and a

Re: [Numpy-discussion] asanyarray vs. asarray

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 7:50 PM Eric Wieser wrote: > Subclasses such as MaskedArray and, yes, Quantity, are widely used, and if > they cause problems perhaps that should be seen as a sign that ndarray > subclassing should be made easier and clearer. > > Both maskedarray and quantity seem like som

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Removing priority labels from github

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 2:10 PM Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 4:49 PM Stephan Hoyer wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 2:22 AM Sebastian Berg < >> sebast...@sipsolutions.net> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 2018-10-19 at 11:02 +0300, Matti Picus wrote: >>> > We currently have hi

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Removing priority labels from github

On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 11:08 AM Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 2:10 PM Ralf Gommers > wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 4:49 PM Stephan Hoyer wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.15.3 release

Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team, I am pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.15.3. This is a bugfix release for bugs and regressions reported following the 1.15.2 release. The most noticeable fix is probably for the memory leak encountered whe

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.15.4 release

Hi All, Just a heads up that I am planning on making a 1.15.4 release this coming weekend. The only fixes planned at this point are - BUG: Fix fill value in masked array '==' and '!=' ops, #12257 - BUG: clear buffer_info_cache on scalar dealloc

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Attribute hiding APIs for PyArrayObject

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 3:59 PM Allan Haldane wrote: > On 10/30/18 5:04 AM, Matti Picus wrote: > > TL;DR - should we revert the attribute-hiding constructs in > > ndarraytypes.h and unify PyArrayObject_fields with PyArrayObject? > > > > > > Background > > > > > > NumPy 1.8 deprecated direct acces

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.15.4 release

Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team, I am pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.15.4. This is a bugfix release for bugs and regressions reported following the 1.15.3 release. The most noticeable fix is probably having a boolean type fill value for masked arrays after the use of `==` and `!=`

[Numpy-discussion] Prep for NumPy 1.16.0 branch

Hi All, Time to begin looking forward to the NumPy 1.16.x branch. I think there are three main topics to address: 1. current PRs that need review and merging, 2. critical fixes that need to be made, 3. status of `__array_function__`. The last probably needs some discussion. `__array_fu

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Prep for NumPy 1.16.0 branch

On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 6:16 PM Stephan Hoyer wrote: > On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 10:32 AM Marten van Kerkwijk < > m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Chuck, >> >> For `__array_function__`, there was some discussion in >> https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/12225 that for 1.16 we might want >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpy pprint?

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 3:56 AM Foad Sojoodi Farimani wrote: > Dear András, > > Try those different option in MATLAB for example. or > Octave/Scilab/Sympy-Matrix... they are all the same. The term > "multidimensional arrays" is a little bit vague. one might think of > multidimensional matrices (

Re: [Numpy-discussion] asarray/anyarray; matrix/subclass

On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 2:15 PM Eric Wieser wrote: > > If the only way MaskedArray violates Liskov is in terms of NA skipping > aggregations by default, then this might be viable > > One of the ways to fix these liskov substitution problems is just to > introduce more base classes - for instance,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] lstsq underdetermined behaviour

On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 9:24 PM Eric Wieser wrote: > > In 1.15 the call is instead to `_umath_linalg.lstsq_m` and I'm not sure > what this actually ends up doing - does this end up being the same as > `dgelsd`? > > When the arguments are real, yes. What changed is that the dispatching now > happe

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16

Hi All, Just an update of the NumPy 1.16 release schedule. The last PR milestoned for the release is #12219 , and it is about done. The current release blocker is the upcoming OpenBLAS 0.3.4, which should fix the reported threading problems, but if it doe

Re: [Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16

On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 6:09 PM Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 9:41 AM Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> Just an update of the NumPy 1.16 release schedule. The last PR milestoned >> for th

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Reminder: Numpy dev meeting Fri-Sat Nov 30-Dec 1

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 4:35 PM Travis Oliphant wrote: > I will be available remotely as well, but unable to come to BIDS this > week. > > I am particularly interested in how to improve the dtype subsystem --- > potentially using libndtypes from the xnd project. > > That would be good. We are at

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How to get sources of the current state of 1.16?

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:53 AM Pavlyk, Oleksandr < oleksandr.pav...@intel.com> wrote: > Are they the same as the current master, or is there a mechanism to query > issue tracker for all PRs designated to make it into 1.16? > > > > Even then, what should the base be? > > Current master is the 1.1

[Numpy-discussion] OpenBLAS

Hi All, Just a heads up that OpenBLAS 3.4 has been released. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

[Numpy-discussion] Dropping Python 3.4

Hi All, Currently, NumPy has dropped Python 3.4 support for the 1.16 release while the upcoming SciPy 1.2 version is still supporting it. It looks like current NumPy master still works for Python 3.4, but I wasn't planning to build any wheels for it. Will that be a problem? Chuck

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16 branch

Hi All, Matthew Brett has built OpenBLAS 3.4+ libraries and we are successfully building wheels with them. There are few remaining PRs/issues marked for 1.16, so I expect to make the 1.16. branch in the next several days. If there are PRs, especially bug fixes, that you really, really want in 1.16

Re: [Numpy-discussion] the making of the NumPy roadmap

On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 10:24 PM Ralf Gommers wrote: > Hi all, > > A little while ago I wrote a blog post about the history of us > constructing the roadmap we currently have: > https://rgommers.github.io/2018/10/the-making-of-the-numpy-roadmap/. > There was a request to post it to this list, whic

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16.0rc1 release coming up.

Hi All, I plan on releasing NumPy 1.16.0rc in a day or two. The preliminary release notes are up and any suggestions/corrections/additions are welcome. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16.0rc1 released

Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team I'm pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.16.0rc1. This is the last NumPy release to support Python 2.7 and will be maintained as a long term release with bug fixes until 2020. This release has seen a lot of refactoring and features many bug fixes, improve

[Numpy-discussion] Ia `-fno-strict-aliasing` still required?

Hi All, Just asking if the `-fno-strict-aliasing` flag is still required for gcc. Supposedly `-fstrict-aliasing` is enabled by default with optimization levels >= `-O2` and that used to result in errors. However, I have noticed that numpy wheels are being built without the `-fno-strict-aliasing` f

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ia `-fno-strict-aliasing` still required?

On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 11:26 AM Neal Becker wrote: > Define "doing fine", does it pass all tests? > Yes. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ia `-fno-strict-aliasing` still required?

On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 1:14 PM Nathaniel Smith wrote: > This is a pretty good article on what -fno-strict-aliasing actually does: > https://blog.regehr.org/archives/1307 > > That was pretty much as I recalled. I'm guessing that what changed for NumPy was going to separate compilation and the wide

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16.0rc2 released

Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team I'm pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.16.0rc2. This is the last NumPy release to support Python 2.7 and will be maintained as a long term release with bug fixes until 2020. This release has seen a lot of refactoring and features many bug fixes, improve

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16.0 released.

Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team I'm pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.16.0. This is the last NumPy release to support Python 2.7 and will be maintained as a long term release with bug fixes until 2020. This release has seen a lot of refactoring and features many bug fixes, improved c

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Does numpy depend upon a Fortran library?

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:28 PM Marc F Paterno wrote: > Hello, > > I have encountered a problem with a binary incompatibility between the > Fortran runtime library installed with numpy when using 'pip install --user > numpy', and that used by the rest of my program, which is built using > gfortra

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Does numpy depend upon a Fortran library?

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 6:32 PM Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:19 PM Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:28 PM Marc F Paterno wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>>

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16.1 release

Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team I'm pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.16.1. This release fixes bugs reported against the 1.16.0 release, and also backports several enhancements from master that seem appropriate for a release series that is the last to support Python 2.7. The supported

[Numpy-discussion] New sorting routines.

Hi All, I've put up gh-12945 that preserves forward compatibility of NumPy after the addition of timsort by reusing the mergesort slot in PyArray_ArrFuncs for stable sorts in general, not just mergesort. The same method can be used when we add radixsort

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 'nansqrt' function?

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 1:35 PM Mauro Cavalcanti wrote: > Dear ALL, > > In the process of porting an existing (but abandoned) package to the > latest version of Numpy, I stumbled upon a call to a 'numpy.nansqrt' > function, which seems not to exist. > > Here is the specific code: > > def normTran

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 'nansqrt' function?

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 2:14 PM Mauro Cavalcanti wrote: > Chuck, > > Sure, using numpy.sqrt works fine. > > Thank you very much. > > Best regards, > > Em qua, 13 de fev de 2019 às 19:09, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> escreveu: > >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 'nansqrt' function?

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 3:45 PM Mauro Cavalcanti wrote: > Chuck, > > I attempted to find such a list from the Numpy website. A complete list > like yours should be quite handy for users if available there. > > In ipython In [1]: numpy.lib.nanfunctions? will give it to you. But it looks like a m

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Stepping down as NumFOCUS liason

Hi Nathaniel, On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:19 AM Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Hi all, > > As part of our relationship with NumFOCUS, we have to have some liasons so > they know who to contact etc. So far that's been Ralf and me. But, I > haven't had as much time for numpy recently, and I think it woul

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16.2 released.

Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team I am pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.16.2. This is a quick release fixing several problems encountered on Windows. The Python versions supported are 2.7 and 3.5-3.7. The Windows problems addressed are: - DLL load problems for NumPy wheels on Windo

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Removing undocumented __buffer__ attribute lookup

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 1:37 AM Hameer Abbasi wrote: > Cc-ing in Travis, because he was the original author of the buffer > protocol, and this is most definitely related. > > Best Regards, > Hameer Abbasi > > On Wednesday, Feb 27, 2019 at 9:20 AM, Matti Picus > wrote: > In digging around the cod

Re: [Numpy-discussion] introducing Numpy.net, a pure C# implementation of Numpy

On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 4:41 AM wrote: > This is a quick note to announce open source numpy.net available at this > repository > > > > https://github.com/Quansight-Labs/numpy.net > > > > This is a pure C# based implementation of Numpy, ported from the > underlying C library and the python applica

Re: [Numpy-discussion] introducing Numpy.net, a pure C# implementation of Numpy

On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 10:02 AM Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 4:41 AM wrote: > >> This is a quick note to announce open source numpy.net available at this >> repository >> >> >> >> https://github.com/Quansight-La

Re: [Numpy-discussion] [SPAM]Re: introducing Numpy.net, a pure C# implementation of Numpy

On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 11:10 AM wrote: > > > > > *From:* NumPy-Discussion baselinesw@python.org> *On Behalf Of *Charles R Harris > *Sent:* Saturday, March 16, 2019 12:06 PM > *To:* Discussion of Numerical Python > *Subject:* [SPAM]Re: [Numpy-discussion] intr

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16.3 release

Hi All, I'm planning on releasing 1.16.3 this weekend. There will be more maintenance releases, but if there is something important that you think needs to be in this release, please respond to this email. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-D

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.17.0

Hi All, The middle of May seems about right for branching 1.17.x and making the first rc. I'm happy to make the release, but if someone else would like to give it a try that would be great. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16. 3 release

Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team I am pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.16.3 which contains several fixes for newly reported bugs. The Python versions supported in this release are 2.7 and 3.5-3.7. There are several notable changes. - Unpickling object arrays when loading *.npy o

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Sebastian Berg at BIDS

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 12:54 PM Stefan van der Walt wrote: > Hi everyone, > > We are happy to announce that Sebastian Berg has joined the team at > BIDS, and will be working full-time on NumPy for the next two years. > Sebastian has been a core contributor to the project for seven years > alread

Re: [Numpy-discussion] f2py is not recognizing Absoft Fortran Compiler

On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 7:40 PM Samuel Dupree wrote: > > I'm attempting to build an interface between a Fortran application I > have and Python. The problem I'm having is that f2py is not recognizing > my Absoft Fortran compiler. Details follow. > > I'm running on a iMacPro (2017) under Mac OS X

[Numpy-discussion] Preparation for 1.17.x branch

Hi All, It's time to look forward to branching 1.17.x and the first rc. Please note of any issues that you think fixing or PRs that should be merged before the first release. It would also help if some folks would review the release notes for completeness. I figure the branch should take place in

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Preparation for 1.17.x branch

On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 4:00 PM Stephan Hoyer wrote: > I'd love to get the revisions of NEP-18 finalized. I guess this means > we'll need to reach a decision on > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/13305 > > Charles -- Will you be at the developer meeting in Berkeley this week? > This could be a

[Numpy-discussion] Release vs development testing.

Hi All, NumPy currently distinguishes between release and development versions when running tests. Is there a good reason to continue this practice? I ask, because with the last pytest release it would be convenient to always include `pytest.ini ` so that we can register markers. The presence of `

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Release vs development testing.

On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 6:33 AM Julian Taylor wrote: > On 12.05.19 14:58, Charles R Harris wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > NumPy currently distinguishes between release and development versions > > when running tests. Is there a good reason to continue this practice? I >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Release vs development testing.

On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 7:27 AM Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 3:56 PM Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 6:33 AM Julian Taylor < >> jtaylor.deb...@googlemail.com> wrot

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Release vs development testing.

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 3:02 AM Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 4:41 PM Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 7:27 AM Ralf Gommers >> wrote: >> >>> >>> &g

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Release vs development testing.

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:25 AM Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 3:02 AM Ralf Gommers > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 4:41 PM Charles R Harris < >> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Release vs development testing.

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:50 AM Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Mon, May 13, 2019, 10:26 Charles R Harris > wrote: > >> I just checked that current wheels show the warnings when `numpy.test()` >> is run with latest pytest. However, moving the `pytest.ini` file into the &g

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Converting np.sinc into a ufunc

On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 7:14 PM Marten van Kerkwijk < m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote: > On a more general note, if we change to a ufunc, it will get us stuck with > sinc being the normalized version, where the units of the input have to be > in the half-cycles preferred by signal-processing peop

Re: [Numpy-discussion] scientific Python featured in GitHub keynote

On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 4:09 PM Ralf Gommers wrote: > Hi all, > > On Thursday I had the pleasure to be at GitHub Satellite, together with > quite a few other maintainers from projects throughout our ecosystem, and > see NumPy, Matplotlib, AstroPy and other projects highlighted prominently > in Na

[Numpy-discussion] NumPy 1.16.4 released.

Charles R Harris Apr 21, 2019, 8:39 PM to numpy-discussion, SciPy, SciPy-User, bcc: python-announce-list Hi All, On behalf of the NumPy team I am pleased to announce the release of NumPy 1.16.4 which contains several fixes for newly reported bugs. The Python versions supported in this release

Re: [Numpy-discussion] defining a NumPy API standard?

On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:12 AM Marten van Kerkwijk < m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Ralf, > > Despite sharing Nathaniel's doubts about the ease of defining the numpy > API and the likelihood of people actually sticking to a limited subset of > what numpy exposes, I quite like the actual t

[Numpy-discussion] branch 1.17

Hi All, I'm thinking of branching 1.17 this coming (June 15) weekend. The major components are in: pocketfft, randomgen, and the new sorting routines, along with default `__array_function__`. They may need a bit of polish, but I think little remains to be done. If there are other pending PRs that

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New release note strategy after branching 1.17.

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 8:59 AM Sebastian Berg wrote: > Hi all, > > we had discussed trying a new strategy to gather release notes on the > last community call, but not followed up on it on the list yet. > > For the next release, we decided to try a strategy of using a wiki page > to gather relea

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   >