On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
> Go ahead and merge it in and we'll see how it goes.
>
> I did the merge, and tried to trigger the buildbot, but it looks like a
github svn issue has reared its head:
http://support.github.com/discussions/repos/3155-svn-checkout-erro
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> Does anyone have any objections to me merging the branch into the numpy
> trunk right now?
>
> Chuck suggested I try to split out the ABI changes, but they're kind of
> tangled with the other changes. In particular, they involve fixing the typ
Does anyone have any objections to me merging the branch into the numpy
trunk right now?
Chuck suggested I try to split out the ABI changes, but they're kind of
tangled with the other changes. In particular, they involve fixing the type
promotion code to be enum order-independent, which depended
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> Just to start the conversation, and to find out who is interested, I would
> like to informally propose generator arrays for NumPy 2.0. This concept
> has as one use-case, the deferred arrays that Mark Wiebe has proposed. But,
> it
Thanks for the long email. I think there are a lot of thoughts around some of
these ideas and it is good to get as many of them articulated as possible.
I learn much from these kinds of discussions.I think others value them as
well.
I like your ideas about what kind of overloading hook
Hi,
I'd like to ask for your help regarding the use of SWIG with numpy.
** problem description **
While I can compile successfully the examples provided in ./numpy/doc/swig
I can't compile the first example provided in the Cookbook.
http://www.scipy.org/Cookbook/SWIG_NumPy_examples
"A simple A
On 1/28/11 7:01 AM, Asmi Shah wrote:
> I am using python for a while now and I have a requirement of creating a
> numpy array of microscopic tiff images ( this data is 3d, meaning there are
> 100 z slices of 512 X 512 pixels.) How can I create an array of images?
It's quite straightforward to crea
A brief history:
I wrote the asinh and acosh functions for the math (or was it cmath?) for
python 2.0. It fixed some problems of GVR implementation, but still it was far
from perfect, and replaced shortly after. My 1/4 cent tip: Do not rush ---
find a good code.
Nadav
__
Python 2.6.6 (r266:84374, Aug 31 2010, 11:00:51)
[GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5493)] on darwin
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> import numpy
>>> numpy.__version__
'1.5.1'
>>> class X:
... pass
...
>>> numpy.asarray([X(), numpy.asarray([1, 1])]).shape
(2
Travis Oliphant writes:
> This concept has as one use-case, the deferred arrays that Mark Wiebe
> has proposed.
Interesting, I didn't read about that.
In fact, I was playing around with a proxy wrapper for ndarrays not long
ago, in order to build a tree of deferred operations that can be later
o
Fri, 28 Jan 2011 11:49:34 +0100, Mark Bakker wrote:
[clip]
> Yet when the imaginary part is zero (and it really is a real number),
> the imaginary part is nan:
>
> In [19]: inf * (1+0j)
> Out[19]: (inf+nan*j)
>
> That is not correct. It should really given (inf+0*j). (I know where it
> comes from
On 01/27/2011 10:58 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Mark Wiebe has proposed making the master branch backward compatible with
>> 1.5. The argument for doing this is that 1) removing the new bits for new
>> releases is a ch
Hi guys,
I am using python for a while now and I have a requirement of creating a
numpy array of microscopic tiff images ( this data is 3d, meaning there are
100 z slices of 512 X 512 pixels.) How can I create an array of images? i
then would like to use visvis for visualizing this in 3D.
any hel
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:29 AM, James A. Bednar wrote:
> | Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:32:22 -0700
> | From: Charles R Harris
> |
> | On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
> |
> | > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis Oliphant
> wrote:
> | >
> | > > Hey all,
> | > >
> |
| Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:32:22 -0700
| From: Charles R Harris
|
| On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
|
| > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 17:17, Travis Oliphant
wrote:
| >
| > > Hey all,
| > >
| > > What is the thought about having two separate NumPy lists (one
| > > f
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Ralf Gommers <
>> ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The PIL test can still be fixed before the final 0.9.0 release, it looks
>>> l
Fri, 28 Jan 2011 12:57:18 +0100, Mark Bakker wrote:
> Follow up:
>
> The behavior is correct for real argument:
[clip]
> So maybe we should look there for good logic,
In the real case you can do "if (abs(z) > cutoff) return sgn(z)",
which is not the right thing to do for complex numbers.
Anyway,
Follow up:
The behavior is correct for real argument:
In [20]: sinh(1000)
Out[20]: inf
In [21]: cosh(1000)
Out[21]: inf
In [22]: tanh(1000)
Out[22]: 1.0
So maybe we should look there for good logic,
Mark
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Mark Bakker wrote:
> Good point, so we need a better
On 01/28/2011 12:37 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
> On 01/28/2011 01:01 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
>> Just to start the conversation, and to find out who is interested, I would
>> like to informally propose generator arrays for NumPy 2.0. This concept
>> has as one use-case, the defer
On 01/28/2011 01:01 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Just to start the conversation, and to find out who is interested, I would
> like to informally propose generator arrays for NumPy 2.0. This concept
> has as one use-case, the deferred arrays that Mark Wiebe has proposed. But,
> it also allow
When I multiply a complex number with inf, I get inf + inf*j:
In [17]: inf * (1+1j)
Out[17]: (inf+inf*j)
Even when the imaginary part is really small:
In [18]: inf * (1+1e-100j)
Out[18]: (inf+inf*j)
Yet when the imaginary part is zero (and it really is a real number), the
imaginary part is nan:
Good point, so we need a better solution that fixes all cases
>> I'll file a ticket.
>>
>> Incidentally, if tanh(z) is simply programmed as
>>
>> (1.0 - exp(-2.0*z)) / (1.0 + exp(-2.0*z))
>This will overflow as z -> -\infty. The solution is probably to use a
>different expression for Re(z) < 0, a
Fri, 28 Jan 2011 11:25:19 +0100, Mark Bakker wrote:
> I'll file a ticket.
>
> Incidentally, if tanh(z) is simply programmed as
>
> (1.0 - exp(-2.0*z)) / (1.0 + exp(-2.0*z))
This will overflow as z -> -\infty. The solution is probably to use a
different expression for Re(z) < 0, and to check how
Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:46:22 -0700, Charles R Harris wrote:
> Mark Wiebe has proposed making the master branch backward compatible
> with 1.5. The argument for doing this is that 1) removing the new bits
> for new releases is a chore as the refactor schedule slips and 2) the
> new ABI isn't settled an
I'll file a ticket.
Incidentally, if tanh(z) is simply programmed as
(1.0 - exp(-2.0*z)) / (1.0 + exp(-2.0*z))
the problem is fixed.
Thanks, Mark
[clip]
> > Not for large complex values:
> >
> > In [85]: tanh(1000+0j)
> > Out[85]: (nan+nan*j)
>
> Yep, it's a bug. Care to file a ticket?
>
> The
25 matches
Mail list logo
