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.
> 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...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion