On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, May 9, 2012, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> My only objection to this proposal is that committing to this approach
>> seems premature. The existing masked array objects act quite
>> differently from numpy.ma, so why do y
On Wednesday, May 9, 2012, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>
>
> My only objection to this proposal is that committing to this approach
> seems premature. The existing masked array objects act quite
> differently from numpy.ma, so why do you believe that they're a good
> foundation for numpy.ma, and why wi
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn <
d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no> wrote:
> Sorry everyone for being so dense and contaminating that other thread.
> Here's a new thread where I can respond to Nathaniel's response.
>
> On 05/10/2012 01:08 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> > Hi Dag,
> >
On 05/10/2012 01:01 AM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
> wrote:
>> On 05/09/2012 06:46 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>>> Hey all,
>>>
>>> Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
>>> explain the current status of th
Sorry everyone for being so dense and contaminating that other thread.
Here's a new thread where I can respond to Nathaniel's response.
On 05/10/2012 01:08 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> Hi Dag,
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
> wrote:
>> I'm a heavy user of masks, w
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> > Please test this release and report any issues on the numpy-discussion
> > mailing list.
>
> I think it's probably nice not to ship pyc in the source tarball:
>
> $ find numpy-1.6.2rc1
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Paul Ivanov wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
>> On re-reading, I want to make a couple of things clear:
>>
>> 1) This "wrap-up" discussion is *only* for what to do for NumPy 1.7 in
>> such a way that we don't tie our hands in th
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> On re-reading, I want to make a couple of things clear:
>
> 1) This "wrap-up" discussion is *only* for what to do for NumPy 1.7 in
> such a way that we don't tie our hands in the future.I do not believe
> we can figure out what to do fo
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 06:55:12PM +0200, klo uo wrote:
> This news did not arrive at scikit-learn-gene...@lists.sourceforge.net
> Is above list deprecated?
Andy Mueller did the announcement on the scikit-learn mailing list.
> BTW thanks for supporting and working on this project ;)
Thank you ve
Hi Dag,
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:44 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> I'm a heavy user of masks, which are used to make data NA in the
> statistical sense. The setting is that we have to mask out the radiation
> coming from the Milky Way in full-sky images of the Cosmic Microwave
> Background. Th
Hi,
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> On 05/09/2012 06:46 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>> Hey all,
>>
>> Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
>> explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've
>> done an amazing
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
> explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've
> done an amazing job at providing some context, articulating their views and
> s
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> On re-reading, I want to make a couple of things clear:
>
> 1) This "wrap-up" discussion is *only* for what to do for NumPy 1.7 in
> such a way that we don't tie our hands in the future.I do not believe
> we can figure out what to do fo
On re-reading, I want to make a couple of things clear:
1) This "wrap-up" discussion is *only* for what to do for NumPy 1.7 in
such a way that we don't tie our hands in the future.I do not believe we
can figure out what to do for masked arrays in one short week. What happens
be
We considered lowering the review standard near the end of my direct
involvement in the doc project but decided not to. You didn't mention
any benefit to the proposed changes, so while I'm not active in the doc
project anymore, let me relate our decision.
It's often the case that docstrings get w
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> My three proposals:
>>
>> * do nothing and leave things as is
>>
>> * add a global flag that turns off masked array support by default but
>> otherwise leaves things unchanged (I'm still unclear how this would work
>> exactly)
>>
>> * move
On 05/09/2012 06:46 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
> explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've
> done an amazing job at providing some context, articulating their views
> and suggesting w
> Mark will you give more details about this proposal?How would the flag
> work, what would it modify?
>
> The idea is inspired in part by the Chrome release cycle, which has a
> presentation here:
>
> https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dg63dpc6_4d7vkk6ch&pli=1
>
> Some quotes:
> Feat
> My three proposals:
>
> * do nothing and leave things as is
>
> * add a global flag that turns off masked array support by default but
> otherwise leaves things unchanged (I'm still unclear how this would work
> exactly)
>
> * move Mark's "masked ndarray objects" into a n
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> On May 9, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
>> explain the current status of the mis
On May 9, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
> explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've done
> an amazing job at p
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
> explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've
> done an amazing job at providing some context, articulating their views and
>
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
> Please test this release and report any issues on the numpy-discussion
> mailing list.
I think it's probably nice not to ship pyc in the source tarball:
$ find numpy-1.6.2rc1/ -name "*.pyc"
numpy-1.6.2rc1/doc/sphinxext/docscrape.pyc
numpy-1.6
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and
> explain the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've
> done an amazing job at providing some context, articulating their views and
>
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ralf Gommers
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I'm pleased to announce the availabil
This news did not arrive at scikit-learn-gene...@lists.sourceforge.net
Is above list deprecated?
BTW thanks for supporting and working on this project ;)
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Gael Varoquaux
wrote:
> On behalf of Andy Mueller, our release manager, I am happy to announce
> the 0.11
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ralf Gommers
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I'm pleased to announce the availability of the first release candidate
>> > of
>> > NumPy 1.6.2. Thi
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm pleased to announce the availability of the first release candidate
> of
> > NumPy 1.6.2. This is a maintenance release. Due to the delay of the
> NumPy
> > 1.7.0, thi
Hey all,
Nathaniel and Mark have worked very hard on a joint document to try and explain
the current status of the missing-data debate. I think they've done an
amazing job at providing some context, articulating their views and suggesting
ways forward in a mutually respectful manner. This
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm pleased to announce the availability of the first release candidate of
> NumPy 1.6.2. This is a maintenance release. Due to the delay of the NumPy
> 1.7.0, this release contains far more fixes than a regular NumPy bugfix
> release.
30 matches
Mail list logo
