Re: [Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread Robert Kern
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:04 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:48 PM, Skipper Seabold wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Robert Kern >>> wrote: >>> > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Nathaniel Smith

Re: [Numpy-discussion] phase unwrapping (1d)

2013-01-13 Thread Nadav Horesh
There is an unwrap function in numpy. Doesn't it work for you? Nadav From: numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org [numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org] on behalf of Neal Becker [ndbeck...@gmail.com] Sent: 11 January 2013 17:40 To: numpy-discussion@scipy.org

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.8 release

2013-01-13 Thread David Cournapeau
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: >> Now that 1.7 is nearing release, it's time to look forward to the 1.8 >> release. I'd like us to get back to the twice yearly schedule that we tried >> to maintain through the 1

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.8 release

2013-01-13 Thread Charles R Harris
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > Now that 1.7 is nearing release, it's time to look forward to the 1.8 > > release. I'd like us to get back to the twice yearly schedule that we > tried > > to maintain through

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:48 PM, Skipper Seabold wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Robert Kern >> wrote: >> > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> PR 2875 adds two new functions,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread Alan G Isaac
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Robert Kern wrote: >> One alternative that does not expand the API with two-liners is to let >> the ndarray.fill() method return self: >> >>a = np.empty(...).fill(20.0) > On 1/13/2013 6:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > This violates the convention that in-p

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread Skipper Seabold
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Robert Kern > wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> PR 2875 adds two new functions, that generalize zeros(), ones(), > >> zeros_like(), ones_like(), by

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Robert Kern wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> PR 2875 adds two new functions, that generalize zeros(), ones(), >> zeros_like(), ones_like(), by simply taking an arbitrary fill value: >> https://github.com/numpy/nu

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread Matthew Brett
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Robert Kern wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> PR 2875 adds two new functions, that generalize zeros(), ones(), >> zeros_like(), ones_like(), by simply taking an arbitrary fill value: >> https://github.com/numpy/nu

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.8 release

2013-01-13 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > Now that 1.7 is nearing release, it's time to look forward to the 1.8 > release. I'd like us to get back to the twice yearly schedule that we tried > to maintain through the 1.3 - 1.6 releases, so I propose a June release as a > goal. Call

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread Robert Kern
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Hi all, > > PR 2875 adds two new functions, that generalize zeros(), ones(), > zeros_like(), ones_like(), by simply taking an arbitrary fill value: > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/2875 > So > np.ones((10, 10)) > is the same as >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread Eric Firing
On 2013/01/13 7:27 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Hi all, > > PR 2875 adds two new functions, that generalize zeros(), ones(), > zeros_like(), ones_like(), by simply taking an arbitrary fill value: >https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/2875 > So >np.ones((10, 10)) > is the same as >np.fill

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpydoc for python 3?

2013-01-13 Thread Matthew Brett
Hi, On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 10:46 PM, Jaakko Luttinen wrote: > On 2013-01-10 17:16, Jaakko Luttinen wrote: >> On 01/10/2013 05:04 PM, Pauli Virtanen wrote: >>> Jaakko Luttinen aalto.fi> writes: The files in numpy/doc/sphinxext/ and numpydoc/ (from PyPI) are a bit different. Which ones

Re: [Numpy-discussion] numpydoc for python 3?

2013-01-13 Thread Jaakko Luttinen
On 2013-01-10 17:16, Jaakko Luttinen wrote: > On 01/10/2013 05:04 PM, Pauli Virtanen wrote: >> Jaakko Luttinen aalto.fi> writes: >>> The files in numpy/doc/sphinxext/ and numpydoc/ (from PyPI) are a bit >>> different. Which ones should be modified? >> >> The stuff in sphinxext/ is the development

[Numpy-discussion] 1.8 release

2013-01-13 Thread Charles R Harris
Now that 1.7 is nearing release, it's time to look forward to the 1.8 release. I'd like us to get back to the twice yearly schedule that we tried to maintain through the 1.3 - 1.6 releases, so I propose a June release as a goal. Call it the Spring Cleaning release. As to content, I'd like to see th

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How many build systems do we need?

2013-01-13 Thread Charles R Harris
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 10:26 AM, David Cournapeau wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Ralf Gommers > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:25 PM, David Cournapeau > > wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Charles R Harris > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > On Sun, J

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread Matthew Brett
Hi, On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Hi all, > > PR 2875 adds two new functions, that generalize zeros(), ones(), > zeros_like(), ones_like(), by simply taking an arbitrary fill value: > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/2875 > So > np.ones((10, 10)) > is the same a

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread eat
Hi, On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Hi all, > > PR 2875 adds two new functions, that generalize zeros(), ones(), > zeros_like(), ones_like(), by simply taking an arbitrary fill value: > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/2875 > So > np.ones((10, 10)) > is the same

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread josef . pktd
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > Hi all, > > PR 2875 adds two new functions, that generalize zeros(), ones(), > zeros_like(), ones_like(), by simply taking an arbitrary fill value: > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/2875 > So > np.ones((10, 10)) > is the same as >

[Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like

2013-01-13 Thread Nathaniel Smith
Hi all, PR 2875 adds two new functions, that generalize zeros(), ones(), zeros_like(), ones_like(), by simply taking an arbitrary fill value: https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/2875 So np.ones((10, 10)) is the same as np.filled((10, 10), 1) The implementations are trivial, but the API seem

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How many build systems do we need?

2013-01-13 Thread David Cournapeau
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:25 PM, David Cournapeau > wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:44 AM, David Cournapeau >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 13, 201

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How many build systems do we need?

2013-01-13 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> > Hi All, >> > >> > In the continuing proposal for cleanups, note that we currently support >> > three (3!)

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How many build systems do we need?

2013-01-13 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:25 PM, David Cournapeau wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:44 AM, David Cournapeau > > wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Ralf Gommers > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Sun,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How many build systems do we need?

2013-01-13 Thread David Cournapeau
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:44 AM, David Cournapeau > wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Ralf Gommers >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Charles R Harris >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi All, >> >> >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How many build systems do we need?

2013-01-13 Thread Charles R Harris
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:44 AM, David Cournapeau wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Ralf Gommers > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Charles R Harris > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi All, > >> > >> In the continuing proposal for cleanups, note that we currently support > >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How many build systems do we need?

2013-01-13 Thread Charles R Harris
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > In the continuing proposal for cleanups, note that we currently support > > three (3!) build systems, distutils, scons, and bento. That's a bit much > to > > m

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How many build systems do we need?

2013-01-13 Thread Nathaniel Smith
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > Hi All, > > In the continuing proposal for cleanups, note that we currently support > three (3!) build systems, distutils, scons, and bento. That's a bit much to > maintain when contemplating changes, and scons and bento both have external

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How many build systems do we need?

2013-01-13 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 2:44 PM, David Cournapeau wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Ralf Gommers > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Charles R Harris > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi All, > >> > >> In the continuing proposal for cleanups, note that we currently support > >>

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How many build systems do we need?

2013-01-13 Thread David Cournapeau
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 7:29 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Charles R Harris > wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> In the continuing proposal for cleanups, note that we currently support >> three (3!) build systems, distutils, scons, and bento. That's a bit much to >> mai

Re: [Numpy-discussion] How many build systems do we need?

2013-01-13 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > Hi All, > > In the continuing proposal for cleanups, note that we currently support > three (3!) build systems, distutils, scons, and bento. That's a bit much to > maintain when contemplating changes, and scons and bento both have externa

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Insights / lessons learned from NumPy design

2013-01-13 Thread Mike Anderson
On 10 January 2013 05:19, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote: > On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 2:57 AM, Mike Anderson > > > I'm hoping the API will be independent of storage format - i.e. the > > underlying implementations can store the data any way they like. So the > API > > will be written in terms of