Send SciPy-Dev mailing list submissions to
scipy-dev@scipy.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
scipy-dev-request@scipy.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
scipy-dev-owner@scipy.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of SciPy-Dev digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Loss of precision using lsoda f2py interface or ode class
(Joris Vankerschaver)
2. Re: Need some help to wrap the cubature package in
scipy/integrate (Nathan Woods)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 14:56:49 +0200
From: Joris Vankerschaver <jvankers@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [SciPy-Dev] Loss of precision using lsoda f2py interface
or ode class
To: SciPy Developers List <scipy-dev@scipy.org>
Message-ID: <504DC808-6E3E-436B-A936-696B51834882@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On 23-aug-2013, at 02:15, Juan Luis Cano wrote:
> I fear odeint/ode bugs are starting to pile up (gh-1567, gh-1801,
> gh-1976, gh-2515, gh-2570), and as many have suggested in the past a
> rewrite or redesign would be quite helpful.
This may have been pointed out before, but one inconsistency that should be fixed in an eventual redesign is that scipy.integrate.ode expects an RHS of the form `f(t, y0, ...)` whereas odeint expects an RHS with the first two parameters reversed, i.e. of the form `f(y0, t, ...)`. The former convention is the standard in Matlab and Sage.
All the best,
Joris
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 10:22:01 -0600
From: Nathan Woods <charlesnwoods@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [SciPy-Dev] Need some help to wrap the cubature package
in scipy/integrate
To: SciPy Developers List <scipy-dev@scipy.org>
Message-ID: <-1837672449859755872@unknownmsgid>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
We just had a multidimensional integrator (nquad) wrapped into the latest
beta version of scipy. How does cubature compare? I've been kicking around
the idea of improving the speed of nquad by moving more of the code to a
compiled language. How would that compare?
Nate
On Aug 23, 2013, at 5:35 AM, Saullo Castro <saullogiovani@gmail.com> wrote:
I am wrapping the Cubature package for multi-dimensional integration that
supports vector-valued functions and offers both fixed and adaptive
integration schemes.
Please, see more details here:
http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Cubature
I've forked the scipy repository and my current attempt can be directly
accessed here:
https://github.com/saullocastro/scipy/blob/master/scipy/integrate/_cubature.pyx
When compiling the cython code I am getting the error:
_cubature.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol hcubature
referenced in function __pyx_pf_9_cubature_fhcubature
C:\usr\scipy\scipy\integrate\_cubature.pyd : fatal error LNK1120: 1
unresolved externals
error: command 'link.exe' failed with exit status 1120
Could you please have a look?
Thank you very much!
Saullo
_______________________________________________
SciPy-Dev mailing list
SciPy-Dev@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/scipy-dev/attachments/20130823/70c59ad6/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
SciPy-Dev mailing list
SciPy-Dev@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
End of SciPy-Dev Digest, Vol 118, Issue 31
******************************************