I've given several talks on the subject, but I don't think I've ever written a
blog-post about it. A reasonable history does exist in the beginning of
the "Guide to NumPy" which is still available for free at
http://www.tramy.us/numpybook.pdf
-Travis
On Apr 25, 2012, at 12:18 AM, Fer
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 05:59:09PM -0600, Charles R Harris wrote:
> Travis, if you are playing the BDFL role, then just make the darn decision
> and remove the code so we can get on with life. As it is you go back and
> forth and that does none of us any good, you're a big guy and you're
> rocking
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 10:02 PM, wrote:
> Sorry that I missed this part of numpy history, I always had the
> impression that numpy is run by a community led by Chuck and the young
> guys, David, Pauli, Stefan, Pierre; and Robert on the mailing list .
> (But I came late, and am just a balcony mup
On Apr 25, 2012, at 12:02 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> On Apr 24, 2012, at 10:50 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Charles R Ha
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> On Apr 24, 2012, at 10:50 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Charles R Harris
>> wrote:
>> > Fernando, I'm not checking credentials, I'm curio
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> On Apr 24, 2012, at 10:50 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Fernando Perez
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Charles R Harris
>> wrote:
>> > Fernando, I'm not checking credentials, I'm c
On Apr 24, 2012, at 10:50 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > Fernando, I'm not checking credentials, I'm curious.
>
> Well, at least I think that an inquisitive query about
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> Turnover is a problem with open source, and no matter how much discussion
> there is, if people aren't doing the work the whole thing sort of peters
> out.
That's very true, and I hope that by building a friendly and welcoming
environment
On Apr 24, 2012, at 9:41 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Charles R Harris
>>> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > Fernando, I'm not checking credentials, I'm curious.
>
> Well, at least I think that an inquisitive query about someone's
> background, phrased like that, can be very easily mis
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
>> Fernando, I'm not checking credentials, I'm curious.
>
> Well, at least I think that an inquisitive query about someone's
> background, phrased like that, can be very easily mis
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> Fernando, I'm not checking credentials, I'm curious.
Well, at least I think that an inquisitive query about someone's
background, phrased like that, can be very easily misread. I can only
speak for myself, but I immediately had the impre
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > I admit to a certain curiosity about your own involvement in FOSS
> projects,
> > and I know I'm not alone in this. Google shows several years of
> discussion
> > on Monotone, b
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> I admit to a certain curiosity about your own involvement in FOSS projects,
> and I know I'm not alone in this. Google shows several years of discussion
> on Monotone, but I have no idea what your contributions were
Seriously???
Please,
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Charles R Harris
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Fernando Perez
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Apr 23, 2
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Fernando Perez
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Stéfan van der Walt
> >> wrote:
> >> > If you are referring to
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Fernando Perez
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Stéfan van der Walt
>> wrote:
>> > If you are referring to the traditional concept of a fork, and not to
>> > the type we frequently mak
On Apr 24, 2012, at 7:16 PM, Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
>> But a right to veto doesn't automatically extend to everyone who happens to
>> have
>> an interest in a topic.
This is not my view, but it is Charles view and as he is an acti
On Apr 24, 2012, at 6:59 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> On Apr 24, 2012, at 6:01 PM, Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Charles R Harris
> > wrote:
> >>> Why are we having a discussion on NAN's in
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:49 AM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> I think we adhere to these pretty well already, the problem is with the word
> 'everyone'. I grew up in Massachusetts where town meetings were a tradition.
> At those meetings the townsfolk voted on the budget, zoning, construction of
> p
On Tuesday, April 24, 2012, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Charles R Harris
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > 2012/4/24 Stéfan van der Walt >
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Charles R Harris
> >> > wrote:
> >> > The advantage of nans, I suppose, is that they are i
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> But a right to veto doesn't automatically extend to everyone who happens to
> have
> an interest in a topic.
The time has long gone when we simply hacked on NumPy for our own
benefit; if you will, NumPy users are our customers, and they
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> On Apr 24, 2012, at 6:01 PM, Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Charles R Harris
> > wrote:
> >>> Why are we having a discussion on NAN's in a thread on consensus?
> >>> This is a strong indicator of the pr
2012/4/24 Stéfan van der Walt
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> >> Why are we having a discussion on NAN's in a thread on consensus?
> >> This is a strong indicator of the problem we're facing.
> >
> > We seem to have a consensus regarding interest in the topic.
>
>
On Apr 24, 2012, at 5:52 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> 2012/4/24 Stéfan van der Walt
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Charles R Harris
>>> wrote:
The advantage of nans, I suppose, is that they are in the
On Apr 24, 2012, at 6:01 PM, Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
>>> Why are we having a discussion on NAN's in a thread on consensus?
>>> This is a strong indicator of the problem we're facing.
>>
>> We seem to have a consensus regarding inte
Thanks for the reminder, Stefan and keeping us on track.
It is very helpful to those trying to sort through the messages to keep the
discussions to one subject per thread.
-Travis
On Apr 24, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Charles R Harris
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>> Why are we having a discussion on NAN's in a thread on consensus?
>> This is a strong indicator of the problem we're facing.
>
> We seem to have a consensus regarding interest in the topic.
For the benefit of those of us interested in bo
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> 2012/4/24 Stéfan van der Walt
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Charles R Harris
>> wrote:
>> > The advantage of nans, I suppose, is that they are in the hardware and
>> > so
>>
>> Why are we having a discussion on NAN's i
2012/4/24 Stéfan van der Walt
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > The advantage of nans, I suppose, is that they are in the hardware and so
>
> Why are we having a discussion on NAN's in a thread on consensus?
> This is a strong indicator of the problem we're facing
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
> Should be 6 in 1.6
>
> # Binary compatibility version number. This number is increased whenever the
> # C-API is changed such that binary compatibility is broken, i.e. whenever a
> # recompile of extension modules is needed.
> C_ABI_VERS
2012/4/24 Frédéric Bastien
> Hi,
>
> I finished reading the doc I listed in the other thread. As the NA
> stuff will be marked as Experimental in numpy 1.7, why not define a
> new macro like NPY_NA_VERSION that will give the version of the NA
> C-api? That way, people will be able to detect if th
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
> > The advantage of nans, I suppose, is that they are in the hardware and so
>
> Why are we having a discussion on NAN's in a thread on consensus?
> This is a strong indicato
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> The advantage of nans, I suppose, is that they are in the hardware and so
Why are we having a discussion on NAN's in a thread on consensus?
This is a strong indicator of the problem we're facing.
Stéfan
_
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:25 AM, wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Pierre Haessig
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > Le 24/04/2012 15:14, Charles R Harris a
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Pierre Haessig
wrote:
> If the idea of having two payloads is to avoid a maximum of "skipna &
> friends" extra keywords, I would like it much. My feeling with my small
> experience with R is that I end up calling every function with a
> different magical set of key
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:25 AM, wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Pierre Haessig
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Le 24/04/2012 15:14, Charles R Harris a écrit :
>> >>
>> >> a) All arrays should be implicitly masked, even if
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Charles R Harris <
charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:25 AM, wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Pierre Haessig
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Le 24/04/2012 15:14, Charles R Harris a écrit :
>> >>
>> >> a) All arrays should
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:25 AM, wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Pierre Haessig
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Le 24/04/2012 15:14, Charles R Harris a écrit :
> >>
> >> a) All arrays should be implicitly masked, even if the mask isn't
> >> initially allocated. The maskna keyword can then be
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:14 AM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Fernando Perez
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Stéfan van der Walt
>> wrote:
>> > If you are referring to the traditional concept of a fork, and not to
>> > the type we frequentl
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Pierre Haessig
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le 24/04/2012 15:14, Charles R Harris a écrit :
>>
>> a) All arrays should be implicitly masked, even if the mask isn't
>> initially allocated. The maskna keyword can then be removed, taking
>> with it the sense that there are two ki
Hi,
I finished reading the doc I listed in the other thread. As the NA
stuff will be marked as Experimental in numpy 1.7, why not define a
new macro like NPY_NA_VERSION that will give the version of the NA
C-api? That way, people will be able to detect if there is change in
the c-api of NA when th
Hi,
Le 24/04/2012 15:14, Charles R Harris a écrit :
>
> a) All arrays should be implicitly masked, even if the mask isn't
> initially allocated. The maskna keyword can then be removed, taking
> with it the sense that there are two kinds of arrays.
>
From my lazy user perspective, having masked an
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Stéfan van der Walt
> wrote:
> > If you are referring to the traditional concept of a fork, and not to
> > the type we frequently make on GitHub, then I'm surprised that no one
> > has objected already. Wh
hi all,
free solver interalg for global nonlinear optimization with specifiable
accuracy now can handle categorical variables, disjunctive (and other
logical) constraints, thus making it available to solve GDP, possibly in
multiobjective form.
There are ~ 2 months till next OpenOpt release, but
45 matches
Mail list logo
