On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 12:14 AM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Matthew Brett
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Ralf Gommers
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Matthew Brett
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Ralf Gommers
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Matthew Brett
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> O
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Matthew Brett
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Matthew Brett
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> >
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Matthew Brett
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Matthew Brett
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > One of our kind users pointed out an error when using easy_install to
>> > install ou
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Matthew Brett
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > One of our kind users pointed out an error when using easy_install to
> > install our package nipy. I've reproduced it now on a bare package
> > using numpy dis
This seems to be a old problem but I've recently hit with this in a very
random way (I'm using numpy 1.6.1). There seems to be a ticket (1239)
but it seems the issue is unscheduled. Can somebody tell me if this is
fixed?
In particular, it makes for a very unstable behavior when you try to
refer
On 3. okt. 2012, at 18:22, Chris Barker wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Paul Anton Letnes
> wrote:
>
>>> I'm not sure the problem you are trying to solve -- accumulating in a
>>> list is pretty efficient anyway -- not a whole lot overhead.
>>
>> Oh, there's significant overhead, since
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Paul Anton Letnes
wrote:
>> I'm not sure the problem you are trying to solve -- accumulating in a
>> list is pretty efficient anyway -- not a whole lot overhead.
>
> Oh, there's significant overhead, since we're not talking of a list - we're
> talking of a list-of
On 1. okt. 2012, at 21:07, Chris Barker wrote:
> Paul,
>
> Nice to see someone working on these issues, but:
>
> I'm not sure the problem you are trying to solve -- accumulating in a
> list is pretty efficient anyway -- not a whole lot overhead.
Oh, there's significant overhead, since we're no
On 3. okt. 2012, at 17:48, Wes McKinney wrote:
> On Monday, October 1, 2012, Chris Barker wrote:
> Paul,
>
> Nice to see someone working on these issues, but:
>
> I'm not sure the problem you are trying to solve -- accumulating in a
> list is pretty efficient anyway -- not a whole lot overhead.
On Monday, October 1, 2012, Chris Barker wrote:
> Paul,
>
> Nice to see someone working on these issues, but:
>
> I'm not sure the problem you are trying to solve -- accumulating in a
> list is pretty efficient anyway -- not a whole lot overhead.
>
> But if you do want to improve that, it may be b
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 1:05 AM, Frédéric Bastien wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Finally, the change about the casting rule was done in NumPy 1.6. It
> is our test that checked specifically for numpy 1.6 behavior. But
> adding the test to make sure it don't change is an excellent idea.
Sorry - family reun
12 matches
Mail list logo
