On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
> wrote:
> > Oh, right. I was thinking "small" as in "fits in L2 cache", not small as
> > in a few dozen entries.
Another example of a small array use-case: I've been using numpy for
For convenience, here's a link to the mailing list thread on this topic
from a couple months ago:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/47094 .
Drew
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/ma
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, February 9, 2012, Sturla Molden wrote:
> >
> >
> > Den 9. feb. 2012 kl. 22:44 skrev eat :
> >
> >>
> > Maybe this issue is raised also earlier, but wouldn't it be more
> consistent to let arange operate only with integers (l
Eric Firing hawaii.edu> writes:
>
> On 02/08/2012 09:31 PM, teomat wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Am I wrong or the numpy.arange() function is not correct 100%?
> >
> > Try to do this:
> >
> > In [7]: len(np.arange(3.1, 4.9, 0.1))
> > Out[7]: 18
> >
> > In [8]: len(np.arange(8.1, 9.9, 0.1))
> > Out[
