It sounds like np.partition could be used to answer the question:
give me the highest K elements in a vector.
Is this a correct interpretation? Something like partial sort, but returned
elements are unsorted.
I could really make some use of this, but in my case it is a list of objects I
need t
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Dieter Van Eessen <
dieter.van.ees...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've read that numpy.array isn't arranged according to the
> 'right-hand-rule' (right-hand-rule => thumb = +x; index finger = +y, bend
> middle finder = +z). This is also confirmed by an old message I dug up
On 01/29/2015 09:58 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
> > I was thinking elapsed time. Nanoseconds can be rather crude for that
> > depending on the measurement.
>
> Wouldn't the user just keep elapsed time as a
> count, or floating point number, in whatever units the instrument spits
>
>
> > I was thinking elapsed time. Nanoseconds can be rather crude for that
> > depending on the measurement.
>
> Wouldn't the user just keep elapsed time as a
> count, or floating point number, in whatever units the instrument spits
> out? Why does it need to be treated in a different way from
Hello again,
I also have a minor code comment:
In get_object_offsets you iterate over dtype.fields.values(). Be
careful, because dtype.fields also includes the field titles. For
example this fails:
dta = np.dtype([(('a', 'title'), 'O'), ('b', 'O'), ('c', 'i1')])
dtb = np.dtype([('a', 'O'
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:56 AM, Jaime Fernández del Río
wrote:
[...]
> With all these in mind, my proposal for the new behavior is that taking a
> view of an array with a different dtype would require:
>
> That the newtype and oldtype be compatible, as defined by the algorithm
> checking object
Hi Jamie,
I'm not sure whether to reply here or on github!
I have a comment on the condition "There must be the same total number
of objects before and after".
I originally looked into this to solve
https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/3256, which involves taking a view
of a subset of the field
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Eric Firing wrote:
> On 2015/01/28 6:29 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
> >
> >
> > And as for "The 64 bits of long long really isn't enough and leads
> > to all sorts of compromises". not long enough for what? I've always
> > thought that what we need is
