On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:47 PM, wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:38 PM, wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
>> >> Mean value replacement, or more generally single scalar value
>> >> replaceme
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:47 PM, wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:38 PM, wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:08 PM, wrote:
>> >>>
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:47 PM, wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:38 PM, wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:08 PM, wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
> >>> wrote:
>
On 07/06/2011 03:37 PM, Pierre GM wrote:
> On Jul 6, 2011, at 10:11 PM, Bruce Southey wrote:
>
>> On 07/06/2011 02:38 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Christopher Barker
>>> wrote:
>>> Christopher Jordan-Squire wrote:
If we follow those rules for
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
> Christopher Barker wrote:
>
> > Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
> >> Here's an HPC perspective...:
> >
> >> At least I feel that the transparency of NumPy is a huge part of its
> >> current success. Many more than me spend half their time in C/Fort
Christopher Barker wrote:
> Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
>> Here's an HPC perspective...:
>
>> At least I feel that the transparency of NumPy is a huge part of its
>> current success. Many more than me spend half their time in C/Fortran
>> and half their time in Python.
>
> Absolutely -- and this
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:38 PM, wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:08 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Christophe
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:08 PM, wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Christopher Barker
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Christopher Jor
On Jul 6, 2011, at 10:11 PM, Bruce Southey wrote:
> On 07/06/2011 02:38 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Christopher Barker
>> wrote:
>> Christopher Jordan-Squire wrote:
>> > If we follow those rules for IGNORE for all computations, we sometimes
>
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:08 PM, wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Christopher Barker <
> chris.bar...@noaa.gov>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Christopher Jordan-Squire wrote:
> >> > If we follow those rules for IGNORE
On 07/06/2011 02:38 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Christopher Barker
mailto:chris.bar...@noaa.gov>> wrote:
Christopher Jordan-Squire wrote:
> If we follow those rules for IGNORE for all computations, we
sometimes
> get some weird output
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Christopher Barker
> wrote:
>>
>> Christopher Jordan-Squire wrote:
>> > If we follow those rules for IGNORE for all computations, we sometimes
>> > get some weird output. For example:
>> > [ [1
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Christopher Barker
wrote:
> Christopher Jordan-Squire wrote:
> > If we follow those rules for IGNORE for all computations, we sometimes
> > get some weird output. For example:
> > [ [1, 2], [3, 4] ] * [ IGNORE, 7] = [ 15, 31 ]. (Where * is matrix
> > multiply and n
Christopher Jordan-Squire wrote:
> If we follow those rules for IGNORE for all computations, we sometimes
> get some weird output. For example:
> [ [1, 2], [3, 4] ] * [ IGNORE, 7] = [ 15, 31 ]. (Where * is matrix
> multiply and not * with broadcasting.) Or should that sort of operation
> through
Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
> Here's an HPC perspective...:
> At least I feel that the transparency of NumPy is a huge part of its
> current success. Many more than me spend half their time in C/Fortran
> and half their time in Python.
Absolutely -- and this point has been raised a couple times
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Matthew Brett
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just for reference, I am using this as the latest version of the NEP -
>> I hope it's current:
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/m-paradox/numpy/blob/7b10c9
Christopher Jordan-Squire wrote:
> Here's a short-ish summary of the topics discussed in the conference
> call this afternoon.
Thanks, this is great! And thanks to all who participated in the call.
> 3. Using IGNORE to signal a jagged array. e.g., [ [1, 2, IGNORE],
> [IGNORE, 3, 4] ] should beh
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just for reference, I am using this as the latest version of the NEP -
> I hope it's current:
>
>
> https://github.com/m-paradox/numpy/blob/7b10c9ab1616b9100e98dd2ab80cef639d5b5735/doc/neps/missing-data.rst
>
> I'm mostly relaying stuf
On 07/06/2011 02:27 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
> On 07/06/2011 02:05 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just for reference, I am using this as the latest version of the NEP -
>> I hope it's current:
>>
>> https://github.com/m-paradox/numpy/blob/7b10c9ab1616b9100e98dd2ab80cef639d5b5735/doc/n
On 07/06/2011 02:05 PM, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just for reference, I am using this as the latest version of the NEP -
> I hope it's current:
>
> https://github.com/m-paradox/numpy/blob/7b10c9ab1616b9100e98dd2ab80cef639d5b5735/doc/neps/missing-data.rst
>
> I'm mostly relaying stuff I said, a
Hi,
Just for reference, I am using this as the latest version of the NEP -
I hope it's current:
https://github.com/m-paradox/numpy/blob/7b10c9ab1616b9100e98dd2ab80cef639d5b5735/doc/neps/missing-data.rst
I'm mostly relaying stuff I said, although generally (please do
correct me if I am wrong) I a
Thanks for these notes. Just a couple of thoughts as I looked over these
notes.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
wrote:
>
3. Using IGNORE to signal a jagged array. e.g., [ [1, 2, IGNORE], [IGNORE,
> 3, 4] ] should behave exactly the same as [ [1 , 2] , [3 , 4] ]. Though
Here's a short-ish summary of the topics discussed in the conference call
this afternoon. WARNING: I try to give examples for everything discussed to
make it as concrete as possible. However, most of the examples were not
explicitly discussed during the conference. I apologize in advance if I
misch
23 matches
Mail list logo