Re: [Numpy-discussion] Power domain (was Re: bug in oldnumeric.ma)

2008/5/9 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > It seems like some strategic re-thinking may be needed in the long run, > if not immediately. There is a wide range of combinations of arguments > that will trigger invalid results, whether Inf or NaN. The only way to > trap and mask all of these is to

Re: [Numpy-discussion] clip out

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Keith Goodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Is there a reason why clip doesn't take out as an input? > > Oversight. The out= argument was added to the .clip() method > relatively recently. Oh.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Power domain (was Re: bug in oldnumeric.ma)

Pierre GM wrote: > On Friday 09 May 2008 18:45:33 Eric Firing wrote: >> I don't think the .max() part of that is right; the test needs to be >> element-wise, and turned into a mask. > > Quite right. I was being overzealous... > >> It is also not clear to me that the test would actually catch all

Re: [Numpy-discussion] clip out

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Keith Goodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there a reason why clip doesn't take out as an input? Oversight. The out= argument was added to the .clip() method relatively recently. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harml

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Power domain (was Re: bug in oldnumeric.ma)

On Friday 09 May 2008 18:45:33 Eric Firing wrote: > I don't think the .max() part of that is right; the test needs to be > element-wise, and turned into a mask. Quite right. I was being overzealous... > It is also not clear to me that the test would actually catch all the > cases where x**b would

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, 9 May 2008, Nathan Bell apparently wrote: > I don't fundamentally disagree with your positions on the > deficiencies/quirks of matrices in numpy. However, it's > completely inappropriate to plug one hole while creating > others I think we have to be careful with that argument. The rela

[Numpy-discussion] clip out

Is there a reason why clip doesn't take out as an input? It seems to work when I added it. ___ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Power domain (was Re: bug in oldnumeric.ma)

Pierre GM wrote: > On Friday 09 May 2008 17:13:02 Eric Firing wrote: >> Anne Archibald wrote: >>> 2008/5/9 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: md = make_mask((fb != fb.astype(int)) & (fa < 0), shrink=True) >>> Unfortunately this isn't quite the right condition: >>> >>> In [18]: x = 2.**35; n

[Numpy-discussion] Power domain (was Re: bug in oldnumeric.ma)

On Friday 09 May 2008 17:13:02 Eric Firing wrote: > Anne Archibald wrote: > > 2008/5/9 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> md = make_mask((fb != fb.astype(int)) & (fa < 0), shrink=True) > > > > Unfortunately this isn't quite the right condition: > > > > In [18]: x = 2.**35; numpy.array([-1.]

Re: [Numpy-discussion] bug in oldnumeric.ma

Anne Archibald wrote: > 2008/5/9 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Stefan, (and Jarrod and Pierre) >> >> (Context for anyone new to the thread: the subject is slightly >> misleading, because the bug is/was present in both oldnumeric.ma and >> numpy.ma; the discussion of fix pertains to the lat

Re: [Numpy-discussion] bug in oldnumeric.ma

2008/5/9 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Stefan, (and Jarrod and Pierre) > > (Context for anyone new to the thread: the subject is slightly > misleading, because the bug is/was present in both oldnumeric.ma and > numpy.ma; the discussion of fix pertains to the latter only.) > > Regarding you

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Problem with numpy and distutils on OS X

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 2:32 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks, Robert. Indeed, numpy 1.0.4 does some "monkeypatching" (see the > transcript > below). Interestingly, 1.0.3 did not, so I'm hoping that 1.0.5 may not also. > (I'd rather stay with released version, since I distribute my code to

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Problem with numpy and distutils on OS X

Thanks, Robert. Indeed, numpy 1.0.4 does some "monkeypatching" (see the transcript below). Interestingly, 1.0.3 did not, so I'm hoping that 1.0.5 may not also. (I'd rather stay with released version, since I distribute my code to colleagues, and cannot impose too many conditions on them.) In the

Re: [Numpy-discussion] A matrix user in the land of arrays

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Keith Goodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> That looks good. But at the end of the function I'll have to convert >> back to a 1d array if the input is 1d >> >> np.whence_you_came_from(x) >> >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Charles R Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 9:56 AM, Jonathan Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Timothy Hochberg wrote: >> > +0 >> > >> > My personal opinion is that current matrix class is pretty useless and >> > the change won't

Re: [Numpy-discussion] A matrix user in the land of arrays

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Keith Goodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That looks good. But at the end of the function I'll have to convert > back to a 1d array if the input is 1d > > np.whence_you_came_from(x) > > I guess there is no way to not test for the shape. Well, in this case, since yo

Re: [Numpy-discussion] A matrix user in the land of arrays

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Keith Goodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The recently proposed changes to the matrix class was the final push I >> needed to begin slowly porting my package from matrices to arrays. But >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Problem with numpy and distutils on OS X

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Michele Vallisneri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm writing a standard distutils setup.py to compile a Python C > extension on OS X 10.4, and I need to specify a few special compiler > options to enable vector CPU extension (altivec and SSE on i686 and > PPC respect

Re: [Numpy-discussion] A matrix user in the land of arrays

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Keith Goodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The recently proposed changes to the matrix class was the final push I > needed to begin slowly porting my package from matrices to arrays. But > I'm already stuck in the first stage (all new modules must use > arrays). > >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Alan G Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That's how we got here in the first place, I think. > Trading off problems in current behavior vs. the possibility > that other code (like Nathan's) might rely on that bad behavior. > Uncomfortable either way. We'll, I th

[Numpy-discussion] A matrix user in the land of arrays

The recently proposed changes to the matrix class was the final push I needed to begin slowly porting my package from matrices to arrays. But I'm already stuck in the first stage (all new modules must use arrays). Here's a toy example of iterating over columns of a matrix: x is a nxm matrix y is

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, 9 May 2008, Charles R Harris apparently wrote: > I am against messing with the numpy code just to > accommodate a matrix class that shouldn't have inherited > from ndarray in the first place. So I am OK with backing > out the changes as long as we also leave all the bugs in > place.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, 9 May 2008, Timothy Hochberg apparently wrote: > I think the matrix class is kind of useless, In my field (economics), it has been a great way to introduce students to NumPy. I suggest that this reason alone makes it far from "useless". I also personally find it convenient for linear a

Re: [Numpy-discussion] bug in oldnumeric.ma

On Friday 09 May 2008 12:55:39 Eric Firing wrote: > Stefan, (and Jarrod and Pierre) > Regarding your objections to r5137: good point. I wondered about that. > I think the function should look like this (although it might be > possible to speed up the implementation for the most common case): O

Re: [Numpy-discussion] bug in oldnumeric.ma

Stefan, (and Jarrod and Pierre) (Context for anyone new to the thread: the subject is slightly misleading, because the bug is/was present in both oldnumeric.ma and numpy.ma; the discussion of fix pertains to the latter only.) Regarding your objections to r5137: good point. I wondered about tha

[Numpy-discussion] Problem with numpy and distutils on OS X

I'm writing a standard distutils setup.py to compile a Python C extension on OS X 10.4, and I need to specify a few special compiler options to enable vector CPU extension (altivec and SSE on i686 and PPC respectively). This compromises the generation of universal binaries, because these op

Re: [Numpy-discussion] bug in oldnumeric.ma

2008/5/9 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Pierre GM fixed this in r5137, so that the result is masked only if the > first argument is negative and the power is between -1 and 1. Why should the output be masked only when the power is between -1 and 1? Other powers also produce nan's. Either way

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 9:56 AM, Charles R Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Of course, if Nathan has already made the changes we will drive him crazy if > we back them out now This shouldn't be a problem, scipy.sparse should work with either Thanks for your concern though :) -- Nathan Bell

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Alan G Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Since I mentioned Nathan's changes, I wish to clarify > something. I have no idea what Nathan's views are, but as > I recall them, it looked to me that his changes would be > robust to backing out. That should be true.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 9:07 AM, Alan G Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Point of information: it looks like Nathan already made the > needed fixes, and the changes made were in my opinion not at > all obscure and indeed were rather minor. (Which does not > deny they were needed.) > That's cor

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 9:56 AM, Jonathan Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Timothy Hochberg wrote: > > +0 > > > > My personal opinion is that current matrix class is pretty useless and > > the change won't help much from my point of view. My preference would > > be to leave the matrix class alon

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

Timothy Hochberg wrote: > +0 > > My personal opinion is that current matrix class is pretty useless and > the change won't help much from my point of view. My preference would > be to leave the matrix class alone, design a new matrix class, with a > different name, for 1.2 and then deprecate the

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Travis Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm having trouble emailing this list from work, so I'm using a > different email address. > > After Nathan Bell's recent complaints, I'm a bit more uncomfortable with > the matrix change to scalar indexing.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 8:51 AM, Bruce Southey <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Travis Oliphant > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, 9 May 2008, Charles R Harris apparently wrote: > if Nathan has already made the changes we will drive him > crazy if we back them out now Since I mentioned Nathan's changes, I wish to clarify something. I have no idea what Nathan's views are, but as I recall them, it looked to me that

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

2008/5/9 Anne Archibald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > How much code is broken by this, compared to (say) the amount broken > by the disappearance of numpy.core.ma? Is this our biggest single API > breakage? You shouldn't import from core -- we never advertised that API. As far as I recall, numpy.ma was

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 8:51 AM, Bruce Southey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Travis Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > I'm having trouble emailing this list from wo

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Travis Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > I'm having trouble emailing this list from work, so I'm using a > different email address. > > After Nathan Bell's recent complain

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

2008/5/9 Travis Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > After Nathan Bell's recent complaints, I'm a bit more uncomfortable with > the matrix change to scalar indexing. It does and will break code in > possibly hard-to-track down ways. Also, Nathan has been a *huge* > contributor to the Sparse matrix

Re: [Numpy-discussion] problem with factorial?

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Neal Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I noticed my fact function: > from scipy.special import gamma > def fact(x): > return gamma (x+1) > > Looks like there's a conflict in scipy over the name 'gamma' (I guess this > was pulled in later in my script when I did '

Re: [Numpy-discussion] searchsorted() and memory cache

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 9:51 PM, Andrew Straw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've got a big element array (25 million int64s) that searchsorted() > takes a long time to grind through. After a bit of digging in the > literature and the numpy source code, I believe that searchsorted() is > implementing

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 8:00 AM, Charles R Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Travis Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> >> Hi all, >> >> I'm having trouble emailing this list from work, so I'm using a >> different email address. >> >> After Nathan Bell's

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, 09 May 2008, Travis Oliphant apparently wrote: > I think we need to: > 1) Add a warning to scalar access > 2) Back-out the change and fix all the places where NumPy assumes > incorrectly that the number of dimensions reduce on PySequence_GetItem. > Opinions? Point of information: it lo

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Travis Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm having trouble emailing this list from work, so I'm using a > different email address. > > After Nathan Bell's recent complaints, I'm a bit more uncomfortable with > the matrix change to scalar indexing.

[Numpy-discussion] problem with factorial?

I noticed my fact function: from scipy.special import gamma def fact(x): return gamma (x+1) Wasn't working. Then I see: gamma Looks like there's a conflict in scipy over the name 'gamma' (I guess this was pulled in later in my script when I did 'from pylab import *') __

[Numpy-discussion] Uncomfortable with matrix change

Hi all, I'm having trouble emailing this list from work, so I'm using a different email address. After Nathan Bell's recent complaints, I'm a bit more uncomfortable with the matrix change to scalar indexing. It does and will break code in possibly hard-to-track down ways. Also, Nathan has

Re: [Numpy-discussion] searchsorted() and memory cache

Hi, I don't know if it helps, but Ulrich Drepper had a 9 part series about memory in Linux Weekly News (http://lwn.net). You can under all 9 linked under his name in the Guest archives (http://lwn.net/Archives/GuestIndex/) as not all are linked together. The first one is: http://lwn.net/Arti

Re: [Numpy-discussion] searchsorted() and memory cache

A Friday 09 May 2008, Andrew Straw escrigué: > I've got a big element array (25 million int64s) that searchsorted() > takes a long time to grind through. After a bit of digging in the > literature and the numpy source code, I believe that searchsorted() > is implementing a classic binary search, wh

Re: [Numpy-discussion] bug in oldnumeric.ma

Jarrod Millman wrote: > On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Pierre GM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Yes, there is a problem with ma.power: masking negative data should be >> restricted to the case of an exponent between -1. and 1. only, don't you >> think ? > > Charles Doutriaux has suggested that 1.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] bug in oldnumeric.ma

On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Pierre GM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, there is a problem with ma.power: masking negative data should be > restricted to the case of an exponent between -1. and 1. only, don't you > think ? Charles Doutriaux has suggested that 1.1.0 shouldn't be released until