[Numpy-discussion] GSOC

Charles R Harris charlesr.harris at gmail.com
Sat Dec 31 10:43:17 EST 2011

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Ralf Gommers
<ralf.gommers at googlemail.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Charles R Harris <
> charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> I thought I'd raise this topic just to get some ideas out there. At the
>> moment I see two areas that I'd like to see addressed.
>>    1. Documentation editor. This would involve looking at the generated
>>    documentation and it's organization/coverage as well such things as style
>>    and maybe reviewing stuff on the documentation site. This would be more
>>    technical writing than coding.
>>    2. Test coverage. There are a lot of areas of numpy that are not well
>>    tested as well as some tests that are still doc tests and should probably
>>    be updated. This is a substantial amount of work and would require some
>>    familiarity with numpy as well as a willingness to ping developers for
>>    clarification of some topics.
>> Thoughts?
> First thought: very useful, but probably not GSOC topics by themselves.
> For a very good student, I'd think topics like implementing NA bit masks
> or improved user-defined dtypes would be interesting. In SciPy there's also
> a lot to do, and that's probably a better project for students who prefer
> to work in Python.
Good points. There is actually a fair bit of work that could go into NA.
The low level infrastructure seems to me somewhat independent of the
arguments about the API. I see four areas there

1) Size - that requires bit masks and a decision that masks only take two
2) Speed - that requires support in the ufunc loops.
3) Functions - isna needs some help, like isanyna(a, axis=1)
4) More support in current functions.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20111231/24149272/attachment.html>

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list