| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| |
|
|\
| |
| | |
API: Make datetime64 timezone naive
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Fixes GH3290
With apologies to mwiebe, this rips out most of the time zone parsing from
the datetime64 type.
I think we mostly sorted out the API design in discussions last year, but
I'll be posting this to the mailing list shortly to get feedback.
Old behavior:
# string parsing and printing defaults to your local timezone :(
>>> np.datetime64('2000-01-01T00')
numpy.datetime64('2000-01-01T00:00-0800','h')
New behavior:
# datetime64 is parsed and printed as timezone naive
>>> np.datetime64('2000-01-01T00')
numpy.datetime64('2000-01-01T00','h')
# you can still supply a timezone, but you get a deprecation warning
>>> np.datetime64('2000-01-01T00Z')
DeprecationWarning: parsing timezone aware datetimes is deprecated; this
will raise an error in the future
numpy.datetime64('2000-01-01T00','h')
|
|/ |
|
|
|
|
| |
Fixes gh-7010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fixes GH2039
This function provides a much more intuitive interface than `np.rollaxis`,
which has a confusing behavior with the position of the `start` argument:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/29891583/reason-why-numpy-rollaxis-is-so-confusing
It was independently suggested several times over the years after discussions
on the mailing list and GitHub (GH2039), but never made it into a pull request:
https://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2010-September/052882.html
My version adds support for a sequence of axis arguments. I find this behavior
to be very useful. It is often more intuitive than supplying a list of
arguments to `transpose` and also nicely generalizes NumPy's existing axis
manipulation routines, e.g.,
def transpose(a, order=None):
if order is None:
order = reversed(range(a.ndim))
return moveaxes(a, order, range(a.ndim))
def swapaxes(a, axis1, axis2):
return moveaxes(a, [axis1, axis2], [axis2, axis1])
def rollaxis(a, axis, start=0):
if axis < start:
start -= 1
return moveaxes(a, axis, start)
|
|
|
| |
This looks more conventionnal
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
* Change ".. function::" -> ".. method::"
* Remove "self" argument
* Change "self" to "obj" in __array_finalize__
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The user guide was missing a quick tutorial --- the basics.* stuff is
somewhat too complex already.
The "building numpy" instructions also should not be "introductory
material".
|
| |
|
| |
|
|\
| |
| | |
DOC: Fixed a typo at line 289 at c-api.array.rst
|
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Fixes #6521
|
|\ \
| |/
|/| |
DOC: fixed typo in arrays.classes.rst
|
| | |
|
|/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The check_return argument and ufunc object field was never used; ditto
for the "new" inner loop selector (which was never implemented), along
with associated typedefs. Since I was looking at this code anyway trying
to figure out which parts were actually in use, I figured I'd clear up
some of the brush to make it easier next time...
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
It may be that you can say that it cannot happen when grow inner
is not enabled as well.
|
|
|
|
| |
The lists needed blank lines before starting.
|
|
|
|
| |
The proper reference is in routines.rst.
|
|
|
|
| |
Also correct its documented default value.
|
|
|
|
| |
List needs to be preceded by blank line.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Examples
:cdata: -> :c:data:
.. cfunction:: -> .. c:function::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Update docs for boolean array indexing and nonzero order.
Add links to row-major and column-major terms where they appear.
Closes #3177
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Viewing an ndarray as a np.recarray now automatically converts
the dtype to np.record.
This commit also fixes assignment to MaskedArray's dtype attribute,
fixes the repr of recarrays with non-structured dtype, and removes
recarray.view so that viewing a recarray as a non-structured dtype
no longer converts to ndarray type.
Fixes #3581
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Document the matmul function and add '@' to the operator
section of the reference manual.
|
|\
| |
| | |
New typemap for in-place arrays of arbitrary number of dimensions:
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
(DATA_TYPE* INPLACE_ARRAY_FLAT, DIM_TYPE DIM_FLAT)
Added unittests, updated documentation.
|
|/ |
|
|\
| |
| | |
ENH: add np.stack
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
The motivation here is to present a uniform and N-dimensional interface for
joining arrays along a new axis, similarly to how `concatenate` provides a
uniform and N-dimensional interface for joining arrays along an existing axis.
Background
~~~~~~~~~~
Currently, users can choose between `hstack`, `vstack`, `column_stack` and
`dstack`, but none of these functions handle N-dimensional input. In my
opinion, it's also difficult to keep track of the differences between these
methods and to predict how they will handle input with different
dimensions.
In the past, my preferred approach has been to either construct the result
array explicitly and use indexing for assignment, to or use `np.array` to
stack along the first dimension and then use `transpose` (or a similar method)
to reorder dimensions if necessary. This is pretty awkward.
I brought this proposal up a few weeks on the numpy-discussion list:
http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2015-February/072199.html
I also received positive feedback on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/shoyer/status/565937244599377920
Implementation notes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The one line summaries for `concatenate` and `stack` have been (re)written to
mirror each other, and to make clear that the distinction between these functions
is whether they join over an existing or new axis.
In general, I've tweaked the documentation and docstrings with an eye toward
pointing users to `concatenate`/`stack`/`split` as a fundamental set of basic
array manipulation routines, and away from
`array_split`/`{h,v,d}split`/`{h,v,d,column_}stack`
I put this implementation in `numpy.core.shape_base` alongside `hstack`/`vstack`,
but it appears that there is also a `numpy.lib.shape_base` module that contains
another larger set of functions, including `dstack`. I'm not really sure where
this belongs (or if it even matters).
Finally, it might be a good idea to write a masked array version of `stack`.
But I don't use masked arrays, so I'm not well motivated to do that.
|
| | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Basic cleanup of the new indexing documentation. Also replace
"subspace" by "subarray" and try to clarify mixed advanced and view
indexing.
[skip ci]
|
| | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Closes gh-5684.
[ci skip]
|
| | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Raises a TypeError if any of the keyword arguments supplied to a
ufunc does not exactly match the name in the signature. Prior to
this, trailing characters were discarded, e.g. 'out2' would be
treated as if it where 'out'.
|
|\ \
| | |
| | | |
ENH: ufuncs can take a tuple of arrays as 'out' kwarg
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Closes #4752
|
|/ /
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Version information added in the Notes section of the functions
accepting stacked arrays and in the discussion of this feature
in the linalg overview.
|
|/
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Per the mailing list discussion [1], I have implemented a new function
`broadcast_to` that broadcasts an array to a given shape according to
numpy's broadcasting rules.
[1] http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2014-December/071796.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
SWIG interface has moved to tools/ directory, so updating the doc to state that
and also the number of tests is reduced since what reported, so a generic "more
than" is used (to avoid similar situations in the future) but likely also the
other numbers should be checked.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|\
| |
| | |
DOC: add documentation for some scalar checks
|
| |
| |
| |
| | |
DOC: Mention that PyArray_Return steals a reference to arr
|