Xavier Gnata wrote:
> I'm using the numpy C API (PyArray_SimpleNewFromData) to perform the
> conversion but my code is written by hands.
I'd like to see that. How are you getting the pointer to pass in to
PyArray_SimpleNewFromData? It looks like you can do something like:
(VA is a valarray)
npy
John Hunter schrieb:
> Is it desirable that numpy.corrcoef for two arrays returns a 2x2 array
> rather than a scalar
>
> In [10]: npy.corrcoef(npy.random.rand(10), npy.random.rand(10))
> Out[10]:
> array([[ 1., -0.16088728],
>[-0.16088728, 1.]])
>
>
> I always end up ext
Is it desirable that numpy.corrcoef for two arrays returns a 2x2 array
rather than a scalar
In [10]: npy.corrcoef(npy.random.rand(10), npy.random.rand(10))
Out[10]:
array([[ 1., -0.16088728],
[-0.16088728, 1.]])
I always end up extracting the 0,1 element anyway. What is
On 9/6/07, George Sakkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sep 5, 12:29 pm, Francesc Altet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A Wednesday 05 September 2007, George Sakkis escrigué:
> >
> >
> >
> > > I was surprised to see that an in-place modification of a 2-d array
> > > turns out to be slower from th
On Sep 5, 12:29 pm, Francesc Altet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A Wednesday 05 September 2007, George Sakkis escrigué:
>
>
>
> > I was surprised to see that an in-place modification of a 2-d array
> > turns out to be slower from the respective non-mutating operation on
> > 1- d arrays, although the
2007/9/5, Christopher Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Matthieu Brucher wrote:
> > Blitz++ is more or less avandoned. It uses indexes than can be
> > not-portable between 32bits platforms and 64bits ones.
>
> Oh well -- that seems remarkably short sited, but would I have done
> better?
Well, it's
