Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: > > On Mar 5, 2011, at 5:10 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers > wrote: > >> >> > > >> >>> I've had a look at the bug tracker, here's a list of tickets for 1.6: >> >>> #1748 (blocker: regression for astyp

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: > >> My point is also that we need to make sure the broadcasting rules are >> consistent for both addition and array copy. >> >> Addition would not create an error if a (1,20) array

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote: > My point is also that we need to make sure the broadcasting rules are > consistent for both addition and array copy. > > Addition would not create an error if a (1,20) array was added to a (20,) > array. Therefore, a (1,20) array can also

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Mar 5, 2011, at 5:10 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote: > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers > wrote: > > > >>> I've had a look at the bug tracker, here's a list of tickets for 1.6: > >>> #1748 (blocker: regression for astype('str')) > >>> #1619 (issue with dtypes, with patch) > >>> #1749 (

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

My point is also that we need to make sure the broadcasting rules are consistent for both addition and array copy. Addition would not create an error if a (1,20) array was added to a (20,) array. Therefore, a (1,20) array can also copied into a (20,) array --- as can a (1,1,1,1,20) array.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:41 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Enthought wrote: > >> This should be changed back so that the former works and the later does >> not. It was intentional that the former worked --- it was consistent with >> broadcasting rules. >> >> A

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Enthought wrote: > This should be changed back so that the former works and the later does > not. It was intentional that the former worked --- it was consistent with > broadcasting rules. > > A (1,20) array can be interpreted as a (20,) array. > > So should a (1

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

This should be changed back so that the former works and the later does not. It was intentional that the former worked --- it was consistent with broadcasting rules. A (1,20) array can be interpreted as a (20,) array. Travis (mobile phone of) Travis Oliphant Enthought, Inc. www.enthought.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote: > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Benjamin Root wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Pauli Virtanen wrote: >>> On Fri, 04 Mar 2011

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote: > >> >> >> On 3/4/2011 1:00 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote: >> > >> > >> > On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: >> >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Ralf Gommers >> >> wrote

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote: > > > On 3/4/2011 1:00 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote: > > > > > > On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Ralf Gommers > >> wrote: > >>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Bruce Southey > >>> wrote: > >

[Numpy-discussion] crash in C++ extension module on process shutdown

Hello, I have an extension module which holds on to a reference to a numpy array in a static variable. When the process shuts down, the C++ destructor triggers array_dealloc via Py_DECREF, and I get Program received signal EXC_BAD_ACCESS, Could not access memory. Reason: KERN_INVALID_ADDRESS at

Re: [Numpy-discussion] np.linalg.norm terrible behavior

for the sum function part, It's not a good way to fix but... if you want more accuracy x=(np.array([1]*1 + [1e4], dtype=np.float32)) np.sum(x*x) 1.0001e+08 You can sort x from small numbers to bigger numbers before you call sum. -Kibeom Kim On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Xavier Gnata wrot

[Numpy-discussion] np.linalg.norm terrible behavior

Hi, I got this problem in a real life code and it took me some time to figure out that np.linalg.norm has a terrible numerical behavior. The problem is nicely described here http://fseoane.net/blog/2011/computing-the-vector-norm/ numpy/linalg/linalg.py claims to be a "high-level Python interfac

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Benjamin Root wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Pauli Virtanen wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:58:14 -0600, Benjamin Root wrote: >>> > I recently had to fix an example in matplotlib whe

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote: > > > > > > On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > >> Before the first beta can be released I think #1748 should be fixed. > >> Before the first RC the Solaris segfaults should be in

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > >>> I've had a look at the bug tracker, here's a list of tickets for 1.6: > >>> #1748 (blocker: regression for astype('str')) > >>> #1619 (issue with dtypes, with patch) > >>> #1749 (distutils, py 3.2) > >>> #1601 (distutils, py 3.2) >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Benjamin Root wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Pauli Virtanen wrote: > >> On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:58:14 -0600, Benjamin Root wrote: >> > I recently had to fix an example in matplotlib where there was a 1xN >> > array being assigned to a 1-D slice of a n

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Pauli Virtanen wrote: > On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:58:14 -0600, Benjamin Root wrote: > > I recently had to fix an example in matplotlib where there was a 1xN > > array being assigned to a 1-D slice of a numpy array. It used to work, > > but it now doesn't. I don't kn

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 4:15 AM, Francesc Alted wrote: > A Saturday 05 March 2011 02:41:12 Charles R Harris escrigué: > > > There is a problem with code generated by Cython 0.13: > > > pytables-2.2.1 and pandas-0.3.0, which were built with Cython > > > 0.13, report several failures and do crash du

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Request for a bit more info on structured arrays in the "basics" page

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:09 AM, Russell E. Owen wrote: >> The page >> >> gives a good introduction to structured arrays. However, it says nothing >> about how to set a particular element (

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Taking a large number of dot products at once

Thank you eat; that's exactly what I neededcouldn't see the forest for the trees. I was determined that there was going to be a single function that would do it :)___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/ma

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Request for a bit more info on structured arrays in the "basics" page

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:09 AM, Russell E. Owen wrote: > The page > > gives a good introduction to structured arrays. However, it says nothing > about how to set a particular element (all fields at once) from a > collection of data. > > For in

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:58:14 -0600, Benjamin Root wrote: > I recently had to fix an example in matplotlib where there was a 1xN > array being assigned to a 1-D slice of a numpy array. It used to work, > but it now doesn't. I don't know if this was intended or not, though. Probably not -- please

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Numpy 1.6 schedule (was: Numpy 2.0 schedule)

A Saturday 05 March 2011 02:41:12 Charles R Harris escrigué: > > There is a problem with code generated by Cython 0.13: > > pytables-2.2.1 and pandas-0.3.0, which were built with Cython > > 0.13, report several failures and do crash during the tests. This > > can probably be fixed by "recythonizing