2008/5/10 Timothy Hochberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Anne Archibald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> 2008/5/10 Nathan Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> > On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Anne Archibald
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I don't expect my opinion
I have added a patch to the ticket. I believe it fixes the problem. It
required mirroring a very complicated logical expression from
PyArray_CastToType in array_cast. I suspect that for readability, this
expression should be encapsulated somewhere as a function, with a
signature like
int Py
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Timothy Hochberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please, let's just leave the current matrix class alone. Any change
> sufficient to make matrix not terrible, will break everyone's code. Instead,
> the goal should be build a new matrix class (say newmatrix) where we ca
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Anne Archibald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> 2008/5/10 Nathan Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Anne Archibald
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't expect my opinion to prevail, but the point is that we do not
> >> even have
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 1:21 PM, Nathan Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would you object to raising a general Warning with a message like the
> following?
>
> "matrix indexing of the form x[0] is ambiguous, consider the explicit
> format x[0,:]"
-1
I am not certain that there is universal agree
2008/5/10 Nathan Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Anne Archibald
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I don't expect my opinion to prevail, but the point is that we do not
>> even have enough consensus to agree on a recommendation to go in the
>> DeprecationWarning. Alas.
Jarrod et al.,
I just ran into a nasty bug, described in ticket 788: under some
circumstances, which I don't understand, the astype method fails to
return a copy and returns the original array instead. It causes bizarre
behavior in basemap (Jeff Whitaker's mapping toolkit for matplotlib),
whic
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Anne Archibald
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't expect my opinion to prevail, but the point is that we do not
> even have enough consensus to agree on a recommendation to go in the
> DeprecationWarning. Alas.
>
Would you object to raising a general Warning wi
2008/5/10 Jarrod Millman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Keith Goodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> If these are backed out, will some kind of deprecation
>>> warning be added for scalar indexing, as Travis suggested?
>>> Robert's request seems in accord with this.
>>
>> S
On Sat, 10 May 2008, Jarrod Millman apparently wrote:
> I don't think it makes sense to add deprecation warnings
> at this point--unless we know exactly what it is that we
> will be doing in the future.
My last comment on this ...
As a user, I would want to know *now* that the behavior of
sca
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Keith Goodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If these are backed out, will some kind of deprecation
>> warning be added for scalar indexing, as Travis suggested?
>> Robert's request seems in accord with this.
>
> Shouldn't a deprecation warning explain what the futur
Would it break a numpy design principle to allow ix_ to take 1xn and
nx1 matrices as input?
Here's the use case I had in mind:
>> import numpy.matlib as mp
>> x = mp.asmatrix(mp.arange(9).reshape(3,3))
>> ridx = x.sum(1) > 3
>> cidx = x.sum(0) > 9
>> x[mp.ix_(ridx, cidx)]
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 9:31 AM, Stéfan van der Walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi Andrew
>
> 2008/5/9 Andrew Straw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > 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 a
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Alan G Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 10 May 2008, Keith Goodman apparently wrote:
>> Shouldn't a deprecation warning explain what the future
>> behavior will be?
>
> I do not think so. I think the warning should say:
> "use x[0,:] instead of x[0] to re
>> On Sat, 10 May 2008, Jarrod Millman wrote:
>>> unless there are major objections, I am going to back out
>>> the matrices changes in the 1.1 branch.
> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 8:08 AM, Alan G Isaac
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If these are backed out, will some kind of deprecation
>> warn
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Keith Goodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Shouldn't a deprecation warning explain what the future behavior will
> be? Is there a firm consensus on what that behavior will be?
For what the opinion of an interested observer is worth: I honestly
can't tell whether t
Hi Andrew
2008/5/9 Andrew Straw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 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 s
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 8:08 AM, Alan G Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 10 May 2008, Jarrod Millman wrote:
>> unless there are major objections, I am going to back out
>> the matrices changes in the 1.1 branch.
>
> If these are backed out, will some kind of deprecation
> warning be added
On Sat, 10 May 2008, Jarrod Millman wrote:
> unless there are major objections, I am going to back out
> the matrices changes in the 1.1 branch.
If these are backed out, will some kind of deprecation
warning be added for scalar indexing, as Travis suggested?
Robert's request seems in accord wit
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 2:47 AM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 4:35 AM, Jarrod Millman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> However, we will be releasing 1.2 in a few months and it will be
>> entirely possible to break the matrices API then if there is an
>> agreement
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 4:35 AM, Jarrod Millman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, we will be releasing 1.2 in a few months and it will be
> entirely possible to break the matrices API then if there is an
> agreement that it still needs to be done.
Please, let's have a firm policy of having a
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Timothy Hochberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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 differ
Hello,
I have obviously decided to delay tagging 1.1.0 until we resolve this.
I didn't realize that numpy matrices were used in scipy or I would
have brought this up before, but whatever matrix change we make in 1.1
has to work with the scipy 0.6. Unfortunately, I can't check myself
at the momen
Anne Archibald wrote:
> 2008/5/9 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>> It seems like some strategic re-thinking may be needed in the long run,
>> if not immediately.
> I think in principle the right answer is to simply run whatever
> underlying function, and mask any NaNs or Infs in the outpu
24 matches
Mail list logo
