Hello!
> What do people think of applying patch #1085.
Fine with me.
> I'd rename the function ...
Let me know if you want me to make these canges
or feel free to make them.
> It looks like the routine doesn't try to determine if the
> views actually overlap, just if they might potentially
> sha
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> On Dec 4, 2009, at 10:09 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:29 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
>>
>> What do people think of applying patch #1085. This patch makes a copy of
>> inputs when the input and output vie
On Dec 4, 2009, at 10:09 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:29 AM, Travis Oliphant > wrote:
What do people think of applying patch #1085. This patch makes a
copy of inputs when the input and output views overlap in ways in
which one computation will change later comp
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:29 AM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> What do people think of applying patch #1085. This patch makes a copy of
> inputs when the input and output views overlap in ways in which one
> computation will change later computations.
>
>
I'd rename the function views_share_base_dat
What do people think of applying patch #1085. This patch makes a
copy of inputs when the input and output views overlap in ways in
which one computation will change later computations.
i.e. what is the output of?
x = ones((10,3))
x += x[1]
I think that copying in such instances is a g
