On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 3:43 AM, Klaus Noekel wrote:
> - We need only numpy, not scipy. Does that imply that we have a good
> chance of producing an install ourselves with the current sources?
The current sources can be compiled by visual studio in 64 bits mode
without problem and should be quite
In article
,
Charles R Harris wrote:
> The Chebyshev class is now working pretty well, but I would like to settle
> some things up front.
>
> 1) Order in which coefficients are stored/passed/accessed.
>
> The current poly1d class ctor is called with the coefficients in high to low
> order, ye
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Jarrod Millman wrote:
> OK, I've checked in the scipy doc improvements:
> http://projects.scipy.org/scipy/changeset/5954
> http://projects.scipy.org/scipy/changeset/5955
>
> Thanks again Jarrod!
> Thanks to everyone who contributed! I will merge the numpy docs l
Hi all,
at the end of July David answered my question about future 64-bit
Windows support as follows:
"There were some discussion about pushing 1.4.0 'early', but instead, I
think we let it slipped - one consequence is that there will be enough
time for 1.4.0 to be released with proper AMD64 sup
OK, I've checked in the scipy doc improvements:
http://projects.scipy.org/scipy/changeset/5954
http://projects.scipy.org/scipy/changeset/5955
Thanks to everyone who contributed! I will merge the numpy docs later today.
Is there anything else I need to do on the SciPy documentation editor
to indi
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Zachary Pincus wrote:
> Hello,
>
> a < b < c (or any equivalent expression) is python syntactic sugar for
> (a < b) and (b < c).
>
> Now, for numpy arrays, a < b gives an array with boolean True or False
> where the elements of a are less than those of b. So this g
Hello,
a < b < c (or any equivalent expression) is python syntactic sugar for
(a < b) and (b < c).
Now, for numpy arrays, a < b gives an array with boolean True or False
where the elements of a are less than those of b. So this gives us two
arrays that python now wants to "and" together. To
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Dr. Phillip M. Feldman
wrote:
>
> I've defined the following one-line function that uses numpy.where:
>
> def sin_half_period(x): return where(0.0 <= x <= pi, sin(x), 0.0)
>
> When I try to use this function, I get an error message:
>
> In [4]: z=linspace(0,2*pi,9)
I've defined the following one-line function that uses numpy.where:
def sin_half_period(x): return where(0.0 <= x <= pi, sin(x), 0.0)
When I try to use this function, I get an error message:
In [4]: z=linspace(0,2*pi,9)
In [5]: sin_half_period(z)
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Jarrod Millman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> > Sorry to ask again, but it would really be very useful to get those
> > docstrings merged for both scipy and numpy.
>
> I will do this now.
> Jarrod
>
Thanks a lot!
Ralf
___
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
> Sorry to ask again, but it would really be very useful to get those
> docstrings merged for both scipy and numpy.
I will do this now.
Jarrod
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.o
Thanks. There's a bit of a snag getting my SVN permissions, and the doc
editor permissions I assume are pending. Once those things are in
place, I can move forward on this and hopefully it will be clear what
needs to be done.
Mike
David Goldsmith wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Ral
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Ralf Gommers > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm done reviewing all the improved docstrings for NumPy, they can be
>> merged now from the doc editor Patch page. Maybe I'll get around to doing
>> the SciPy ones as
This function function often result in incorrect output when the cpu is very
loaded. I do not know how to trace the bug since every "single shot" use, or
step by step trace gives the correct answer, also when running scripts under
"ipython -pdb" solves the problem.
System:
>>> numpy.__version
14 matches
Mail list logo