If the author is willing, I'd say both functions are useful. The "geom"
prefix is very fitting.
- Joe
-- Original message--From: Robert KernDate: Fri, Feb 19, 2016 08:00To:
Discussion of Numerical Python;Subject:Re: [Numpy-discussion] proposal: new
logspace without the l
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Andrew Nelson wrote:
>
> With respect to geomspace proposals: instead of specifying start and end
values and the number of points I'd like to have an option where I can set
the start and end points and the ratio. The function would then work out
the correct number
What about this API? You specify the start point, ratio, and number of
points.
http://spacepy.lanl.gov/doc/autosummary/spacepy.toolbox.geomspace.html
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Andrew Nelson andyfaff-at-gmail.com |numpy
mailing list/Example Allow| wrote:
> With respect to geomspace propo
With respect to geomspace proposals: instead of specifying start and end
values and the number of points I'd like to have an option where I can set
the start and end points and the ratio. The function would then work out
the correct number of points to get closest to the end value.
E.g. geomspace(
>
> Some questions it'd be good to get feedback on:
>
> - any better ideas for naming it than "geomspace"? It's really too bad
> that the 'logspace' name is already taken.
>
> - I guess the alternative interface might be something like
>
> np.linspace(start, stop, steps, spacing="log")
>
> what do
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Alan Isaac wrote:
> Would such a new function correct the apparent mistake (?) of
> `linspace` including the endpoint by default?
> Or is the current API justified by its Matlab origins?
>
I don't think so -- we don't need no stinkin' Matlab !
But I LIKE includi
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Alan Isaac wrote:
>
> On 2/18/2016 2:44 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
>>
>> In a new function not named `linspace()`, I think that might be fine. I
do occasionally want to swap between linear and logarithmic/geometric
spacing based on a parameter, so this
>> doesn't viol
On 2/18/2016 2:44 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
In a new function not named `linspace()`, I think that might be fine. I do
occasionally want to swap between linear and logarithmic/geometric spacing
based on a parameter, so this
doesn't violate the van Rossum Rule of Function Signatures.
Would such
I like the idea, as long as we all remain aware of the irony of having
a "log" spacing for a function named "lin"space.
-Joe
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>>
>> Some questions it'd be good to get feedback on:
>>
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>
> Some questions it'd be good to get feedback on:
>
> - any better ideas for naming it than "geomspace"? It's really too bad
> that the 'logspace' name is already taken.
geomspace() is a perfectly cromulent name, IMO.
> - I guess the alte
Some questions it'd be good to get feedback on:
- any better ideas for naming it than "geomspace"? It's really too bad
that the 'logspace' name is already taken.
- I guess the alternative interface might be something like
np.linspace(start, stop, steps, spacing="log")
what do people think?
-n
I've suggested a new function similar to logspace, but where you specify the
start and stop points directly instead of using log(start) and base arguments:
https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/7255
https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/7268
___
NumPy-Dis
12 matches
Mail list logo
