I'm trying to understand how numpy decides when to release memory and
whether it's possible to exert any control over that. The situation is that
I'm profiling memory usage on a system in which a great deal of the overall
memory is tied up in ndarrays. Since numpy manages ndarray memory on its
own
On Monday, November 12, 2012, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Monday, November 12, 2012, Olivier Delalleau wrote:
> >>
> >> 2012/11/12 Nathaniel Smith
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Matthew Brett <
> matthew.br...@
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Olivier Delalleau wrote:
>>
>> 2012/11/12 Nathaniel Smith
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Matthew Brett
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I wanted to check that everyone knows about and is happ
On Monday, November 12, 2012, Benjamin Root wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Olivier Delalleau wrote:
>
>> 2012/11/12 Nathaniel Smith
>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Matthew Brett
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I wanted to check that everyone knows about and is happy with the
On Monday, November 12, 2012, Olivier Delalleau wrote:
> 2012/11/12 Nathaniel Smith 'n...@pobox.com');>>
>
>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Matthew Brett
>> > 'matthew.br...@gmail.com');>>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I wanted to check that everyone knows about and is happy with the
>> > scal
On 11/12/2012 8:18 PM, Sebastian Berg wrote:
> I have created a pull request
This is still a bit different than I thought you intended.
With `size=None` we don't get an element,
but rather a 0d array.
I thought the idea was to return an element in this case?
Alan
__
Congratulation.
De : numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org [numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org] de
la part de Ondřej Čertík [ondrej.cer...@gmail.com]
Date d'envoi : 12 novembre 2012 17:27
À : Discussion of Numerical Python
Objet : Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.7.0
2012/11/12 Nathaniel Smith
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Matthew Brett
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I wanted to check that everyone knows about and is happy with the
> > scalar casting changes from 1.6.0.
> >
> > Specifically, the rules for (array, scalar) casting have changed such
> > that the
Yep exactly.
I just want to make sure that we talked enough on the principle first
(ie. goals and technical approach), and that indeed the code is good
enough to look at.
I get it from your answer that it is, so I went ahead
https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/2730
Thanks
-nicolas
On Mon, Nov
On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 18:36 -0500, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 5:46 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> > Want to make a pull request?
>
>
> Well, I'd be happy to help Sebastien to change the
> code, but I'm not a git user.
>
I have created a pull request, but tests are still needed... If you
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Peter Cock wrote:
>
> I've not yet run the numpy tests yet, but I think this means
> my github branches are worth merging:
>
> https://github.com/peterjc/numpy/commits/msvc10
>
Hi Ralf,
Pull request filed, assuming this gets applied to the master could
you also
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Ondřej Čertík
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Travis Oliphant
>> wrote:
>> > Hey all,
>> >
>> > Ondrej has been tied up finishing his PhD for the past several weeks.
>> > He
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>> ...
>> Found executable C:\cygwin\usr\bin\gcc.exe
>> g++ -mno-cygwin _configtest.o -lmsvcr100 -o _configtest.exe
>> Could not locate executable g++
>> Executable g++ does not exist
>
>
> A C++ compiler shouldn't be needed for numpy, so it sho
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Travis Oliphant
> wrote:
> > Hey all,
> >
> > Ondrej has been tied up finishing his PhD for the past several weeks.
> He is defending his work shortly and should be available to continue to
> help wi
On 11/12/2012 5:46 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> Want to make a pull request?
Well, I'd be happy to help Sebastien to change the
code, but I'm not a git user.
And I'd have some questions. E.g., with `size=None`,
couldn't we just call Python's random.choice? And for
sampling without replacement,
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:27 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>> Hey all,
>>
>> Ondrej has been tied up finishing his PhD for the past several weeks. He is
>> defending his work shortly and should be available to continue to help with
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:34 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 12:16 PM, Sebastian Berg wrote:
>> So instead of taking a sequence of length 1, take an element as default.
>
> Sebastien has proposed that np.random.choice return
> a single *element* by default, not a 1d array of length 1.
> H
On 11/12/2012 12:16 PM, Sebastian Berg wrote:
> So instead of taking a sequence of length 1, take an element as default.
Sebastien has proposed that np.random.choice return
a single *element* by default, not a 1d array of length 1.
He proposes to associate this with a default value of `size=None`
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Ondrej has been tied up finishing his PhD for the past several weeks. He is
> defending his work shortly and should be available to continue to help with
> the 1.7.0 release around the first of December.He and I hav
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:27 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Matthew Brett
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I wanted to check that everyone knows about and is happy with the
>>> scalar casting changes from
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Matthew Brett
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wanted to check that everyone knows about and is happy with the
>> scalar casting changes from 1.6.0.
>>
>> Specifically, the rules for (array, scalar) casting ha
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Peter Cock wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:20 PM, Peter Cock
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Those changes look correct, a PR would be great.
> >>
> >
> > I'll do that later this week - but feel free to do it your
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wanted to check that everyone knows about and is happy with the
> scalar casting changes from 1.6.0.
>
> Specifically, the rules for (array, scalar) casting have changed such
> that the resulting dtype depends on the _value_ of the
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Nicolas SCHEFFER
wrote:
> I've pushed my code to a branch here
> https://github.com/leschef/numpy/tree/faster_dot
> with the commit
> https://github.com/leschef/numpy/commit/ea037770e03f23aca1a06274a1a8e8bf0e0e2ee4
>
> Let me know if that's enough to create a pull
I've pushed my code to a branch here
https://github.com/leschef/numpy/tree/faster_dot
with the commit
https://github.com/leschef/numpy/commit/ea037770e03f23aca1a06274a1a8e8bf0e0e2ee4
Let me know if that's enough to create a pull request.
Thanks,
-nicolas
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 4:39 AM, George
Hi,
I wanted to check that everyone knows about and is happy with the
scalar casting changes from 1.6.0.
Specifically, the rules for (array, scalar) casting have changed such
that the resulting dtype depends on the _value_ of the scalar.
Mark W has documented these changes here:
http://docs.sci
On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 17:52 +0100, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> > In a comment on the issue https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/2724
> > Sebastian notes:
> > "it could also be reasonable to have size=None as default and have it
> > return a sc
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> In a comment on the issue https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/2724
> Sebastian notes:
> "it could also be reasonable to have size=None as default and have it return
> a scalar/the given axes removed in that case. That would be a real chang
In a comment on the issue https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/2724 Sebastian
notes:
"it could also be reasonable to have size=None as default and have it return a
scalar/the given axes removed in that case. That would be a real change
in functionality unfortunately, but it would make sense for
On 11/12/2012 10:00 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> I don't really have an opinion on whether those
> things should be supported, or what the right API should be; I haven't
> really thought about it. Maybe others on the list have opinions. I was
> just saying that we have plenty of time to decide abou
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 8:59 AM, Sebastian Berg wrote:
>> https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/master/numpy/random/mtrand/mtrand.pyx#L919
>>
>> Sounds like it should be pretty simple to add axis=None which would
>> change the current behavior very little
On 11/12/2012 8:59 AM, Sebastian Berg wrote:
> https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/master/numpy/random/mtrand/mtrand.pyx#L919
>
> Sounds like it should be pretty simple to add axis=None which would
> change the current behavior very little, it would stop give an error
> anymore for none 1-d arrays
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> On 11/9/2012 12:21 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>> you might want to double-check that the
>> np.random.choice in 1.7 actually*does* give an error if the input
>> array is not 1-d
>
> Any idea where I can look at the code?
> I browsed github af
Hey,
On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 08:48 -0500, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> On 11/9/2012 12:21 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> > you might want to double-check that the
> > np.random.choice in 1.7 actually*does* give an error if the input
> > array is not 1-d
>
>
> Any idea where I can look at the code?
> I bro
On 11/9/2012 12:21 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> you might want to double-check that the
> np.random.choice in 1.7 actually*does* give an error if the input
> array is not 1-d
Any idea where I can look at the code?
I browsed github after failing to find
a productive search string, but failed
to f
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:20 PM, Peter Cock wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>>
>> Those changes look correct, a PR would be great.
>>
>
> I'll do that later this week - but feel free to do it yourself immediately
> if more convenient.
>
Hi again Ralf,
OK, new bran
36 matches
Mail list logo
