On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Robert Kern wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 11:08, Christopher Barker
> wrote:
> > On 3/6/11 5:54 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
> >> I suppose this might cause a problem with lazy/quick c extensions that
> >> expected elements in a certain order, so some breakage co
Mon, 07 Mar 2011 11:23:33 -0600, Robert Kern wrote:
[clip]
> Can someone explain exactly what changed? Or point to the changeset that
> made it? It's not clear to me what operations are different under Mark's
> changes.
Mark mentioned three points here:
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python
A Monday 07 March 2011 15:39:38 Pauli Virtanen escrigué:
> Mon, 07 Mar 2011 15:23:10 +0100, Francesc Alted wrote:
> [clip]
>
> > ValueError: numpy.dtype has the wrong size, try recompiling
> >
> > I don't think I'm wrong here, but I'd appreciate if somebody else
> > can reproduce this (either wit
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 11:08, Christopher Barker wrote:
> On 3/6/11 5:54 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
>> I suppose this might cause a problem with lazy/quick c extensions that
>> expected elements in a certain order, so some breakage could occur.
>
> absolutely!
>
> (I've gotten a bit confused abou
On 3/6/11 5:54 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
> I suppose this might cause a problem with lazy/quick c extensions that
> expected elements in a certain order, so some breakage could occur.
absolutely!
(I've gotten a bit confused about this thread, but if this is about the
question of whether struct
Mon, 07 Mar 2011 15:23:10 +0100, Francesc Alted wrote:
[clip]
> ValueError: numpy.dtype has the wrong size, try recompiling
>
> I don't think I'm wrong here, but I'd appreciate if somebody else can
> reproduce this (either with tables or with another Cython-dependent
> package).
Ok, seems this ne
A Monday 07 March 2011 15:17:17 Pauli Virtanen escrigué:
> Mon, 07 Mar 2011 14:57:39 +0100, Francesc Alted wrote:
> [clip]
>
> > > However, the size of PyArray_Descr does not seem to have changed
> > > between 1.5.1 and the Git master. So I'm not sure why you see
> > > this error...
> >
> > Maybe
Mon, 07 Mar 2011 14:57:39 +0100, Francesc Alted wrote:
[clip]
> > However, the size of PyArray_Descr does not seem to have changed
> > between 1.5.1 and the Git master. So I'm not sure why you see this
> > error...
>
> Maybe a Cython problem?
That would be seriously weird. Maybe the binaries you
A Monday 07 March 2011 14:49:26 Pauli Virtanen escrigué:
> Mon, 07 Mar 2011 13:17:55 +0100, Francesc Alted wrote:
> [clip]
>
> > from tables.utilsExtension import getPyTablesVersion,
> > getHDF5Version
> >
> > File "definitions.pxd", line 138, in init tables.utilsExtension
> >
> > (t
Mon, 07 Mar 2011 13:17:55 +0100, Francesc Alted wrote:
[clip]
> from tables.utilsExtension import getPyTablesVersion, getHDF5Version
> File "definitions.pxd", line 138, in init tables.utilsExtension
> (tables/utilsExtension.c:9238)
> ValueError: numpy.dtype has the wrong size, try recompiling
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 5:17 AM, Francesc Alted wrote:
> A Monday 28 February 2011 16:31:59 Ralf Gommers escrigué:
> > >> Proposed schedule:
> > >> March 15: beta 1
> > >> March 28: rc 1
> > >> April 17: rc 2 (if needed)
> > >> April 24: final release
> > >>
> > >> Let me know what you think. Bonu
A Sunday 06 March 2011 06:47:34 Mark Wiebe escrigué:
> I think it's ok to revert this behavior for backwards compatibility,
> but believe it's an inconsistent and unintuitive choice. In
> broadcasting, there are two operations, growing a dimension 1 -> n,
> and appending a new 1 dimension to the le
A Monday 28 February 2011 16:31:59 Ralf Gommers escrigué:
> >> Proposed schedule:
> >> March 15: beta 1
> >> March 28: rc 1
> >> April 17: rc 2 (if needed)
> >> April 24: final release
> >>
> >> Let me know what you think. Bonus points for volunteering to fix
> >> some of those tickets:)
While do
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mar 5, 2011, at 5:10 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers <
>> ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>> >>> I've had a look
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
> On Mar 5, 2011, at 5:10 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>
>
>> >>> I've had a look at the bug tracker, here's a list of tickets for 1.6:
>> >>> #1748 (blocker: regression for astyp
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
>
>> My point is also that we need to make sure the broadcasting rules are
>> consistent for both addition and array copy.
>>
>> Addition would not create an error if a (1,20) array
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> My point is also that we need to make sure the broadcasting rules are
> consistent for both addition and array copy.
>
> Addition would not create an error if a (1,20) array was added to a (20,)
> array. Therefore, a (1,20) array can also
On Mar 5, 2011, at 5:10 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers
> wrote:
>
>
> >>> I've had a look at the bug tracker, here's a list of tickets for 1.6:
> >>> #1748 (blocker: regression for astype('str'))
> >>> #1619 (issue with dtypes, with patch)
> >>> #1749 (
My point is also that we need to make sure the broadcasting rules are
consistent for both addition and array copy.
Addition would not create an error if a (1,20) array was added to a (20,)
array. Therefore, a (1,20) array can also copied into a (20,) array --- as
can a (1,1,1,1,20) array.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:41 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Enthought wrote:
>
>> This should be changed back so that the former works and the later does
>> not. It was intentional that the former worked --- it was consistent with
>> broadcasting rules.
>>
>> A
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Enthought wrote:
> This should be changed back so that the former works and the later does
> not. It was intentional that the former worked --- it was consistent with
> broadcasting rules.
>
> A (1,20) array can be interpreted as a (20,) array.
>
>
So should a (1
This should be changed back so that the former works and the later does not.
It was intentional that the former worked --- it was consistent with
broadcasting rules.
A (1,20) array can be interpreted as a (20,) array.
Travis
(mobile phone of)
Travis Oliphant
Enthought, Inc.
www.enthought.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Charles R Harris <
> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
>>>
On Fri, 04 Mar 2011
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 3/4/2011 1:00 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Ralf Gommers
>> >> wrote
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>
>
> On 3/4/2011 1:00 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Ralf Gommers
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Bruce Southey
> >>> wrote:
> >
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:58:14 -0600, Benjamin Root wrote:
>>> > I recently had to fix an example in matplotlib whe
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> >> Before the first beta can be released I think #1748 should be fixed.
> >> Before the first RC the Solaris segfaults should be in
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
>
>
> >>> I've had a look at the bug tracker, here's a list of tickets for 1.6:
> >>> #1748 (blocker: regression for astype('str'))
> >>> #1619 (issue with dtypes, with patch)
> >>> #1749 (distutils, py 3.2)
> >>> #1601 (distutils, py 3.2)
>
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Benjamin Root wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:58:14 -0600, Benjamin Root wrote:
>> > I recently had to fix an example in matplotlib where there was a 1xN
>> > array being assigned to a 1-D slice of a n
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:58:14 -0600, Benjamin Root wrote:
> > I recently had to fix an example in matplotlib where there was a 1xN
> > array being assigned to a 1-D slice of a numpy array. It used to work,
> > but it now doesn't. I don't kn
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 4:15 AM, Francesc Alted wrote:
> A Saturday 05 March 2011 02:41:12 Charles R Harris escrigué:
> > > There is a problem with code generated by Cython 0.13:
> > > pytables-2.2.1 and pandas-0.3.0, which were built with Cython
> > > 0.13, report several failures and do crash du
On Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:58:14 -0600, Benjamin Root wrote:
> I recently had to fix an example in matplotlib where there was a 1xN
> array being assigned to a 1-D slice of a numpy array. It used to work,
> but it now doesn't. I don't know if this was intended or not, though.
Probably not -- please
A Saturday 05 March 2011 02:41:12 Charles R Harris escrigué:
> > There is a problem with code generated by Cython 0.13:
> > pytables-2.2.1 and pandas-0.3.0, which were built with Cython
> > 0.13, report several failures and do crash during the tests. This
> > can probably be fixed by "recythonizing
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:11 AM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Charles R Harris
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Charles R Harris
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Christoph Gohlke
>>> wrote:
Most packages don't have any apparent problems
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Charles R Harris <
> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Charles R Harris <
>> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Ch
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 3:54 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>
>
> On 3/4/2011 1:00 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>
> I tested the 32 and 64 bit msvc9/MKL builds for Python 2.7 and 3.2.
> There are few test failures (listed below) that look familiar.
>
> I also ran tests and/or examples of a few 3rd part
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>
>
> On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>> Before the first beta can be released I think #1748 should be fixed.
>> Before the first RC the Solaris segfaults should be investigated, and
>> documentation for the new iterator (Python doc
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Charles R Harris <
> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/4/2011 1:00 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 3/4/2011 1:00 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Ralf Gommers
>> >> wrote
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>
>
> On 3/4/2011 1:00 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Ralf Gommers
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Bruce Southey
> >>> wrote:
> >
Thanks (again) for taking this on Ralf. You are doing a superb job and deserve
much thanks for keeping the NumPy project on track.
I'm very encouraged by the NumPy 1.6 work. I was looking over the code some
more on the plane yesterday that Mark Wiebe has checked in (I finally was able
to cr
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 11:54:07AM -0800, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
> I also ran tests and/or examples of a few 3rd party packages that were
> built against numpy 1.5.1: scipy, pygame, PyMOL, numexpr, matplotlib,
> basemap, scikits.learn, ETS.mayavi, Bottleneck, pytables, and pandas.
Wow, this is
On 3/4/2011 11:54 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>
>
> On 3/4/2011 1:00 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Ralf Gommers
>>> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Bruce Southey
wrote:
> On 02/28/2011
On 3/4/2011 1:00 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>
>
> On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Ralf Gommers
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Bruce Southey
>>> wrote:
On 02/28/2011 02:00 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, J
On 3/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Bruce Southey wrote:
On 02/28/2011 02:00 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Travis Oliphant
wrote:
The reason for a NumPy 1.6 s
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Bruce Southey wrote:
>> On 02/28/2011 02:00 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Travis Oliphant
>>> wrote:
The reason for a NumPy 1.6 suggestion, is that Mark (and
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Ralf Gommers
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Bruce Southey wrote:
>> It would be great to do some 'housekeeping' and try to address some of
>> the old tickets dealt with before numpy 2.0. For example, I think ticket
>> 225 (bincount does not accept inp
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Bruce Southey wrote:
> On 02/28/2011 02:00 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Travis Oliphant
>> wrote:
>>> The reason for a NumPy 1.6 suggestion, is that Mark (and others it would
>>> seem) have additional work and features th
48 matches
Mail list logo
