[Numpy-discussion] Where is Jaime?
njs at pobox.com
Tue Dec 8 04:18:04 EST 2015
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Peter Creasey
<p.e.creasey.00 at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> > Is the interp fix in the google pipeline or do we need a workaround?
>>> Oooh, if someone is looking at changing interp, is there any chance
>>> that fp could be extended to take complex128 rather than just float
>>> values? I.e. so that I could write:
>>> >>> y = interp(mu, theta, m)
>>> rather than
>>> >>> y = interp(mu, theta, m.real) + 1.0j*interp(mu, theta, m.imag)
>>> which *sounds* like it might be simple and more (Num)pythonic.
>> That sounds like an excellent improvement and you should submit a PR
>> implementing it :-).
>> "The interp fix" in question though is a regression in 1.10 that's blocking
>> 1.10.2, and needs a quick minimal fix asap.
> Good answer - as soon as I hit 'send' I wondered how many bugs get
> introduced by people trying to attach feature requests to bug fixes.
Ideally, none, because when that happens we frown and shake our
fingers until they split them up :-).
Nathaniel J. Smith -- http://vorpus.org
More information about the NumPy-Discussion