numerical packages for 1.5.2?
fperez528 at yahoo.com
Thu Dec 6 18:34:46 CET 2001
Mark Fardal wrote:
> Fernando Pérez <fperez528 at yahoo.com> writes:
>> > Given that restriction, what version of Numeric should I be
>> > using?
>> Why don't you just create a ~you/local/ directory and build py2.1
>> there? It will take a half hour, and the improvements are
>> substantial. You can just tell your friends to have an alias that
>> points to ~you/local/bin/python for them to use it without
>> upgrading anything.
> So far I've failed to install the rpm for 2.1 on my own computer.
> So has my sysop. I doubt I'm going to manage installing 2.1 on
> ~10 different systems.
No, I said build. As in grab the tarball, ./configure, make, make
install. You can tell configure where to put things. The rpms won't
work because some things are already hardwired in.
> And I can't rule out people wanting to run
> the code on systems I don't have access to.
For that then you have no option but 1.5.2.
> Somebody must have used 1.5.2 at one point--what versions worked
Don't know, sorry.
>> Just an idea, since you lose some important features with
>> python<2.0 for numeric (such as rich comparisons: a<b for a,b
>> arrays returns a number in old python, but a full array of
>> a[i]<b[i] for the newer versions. This can make writing certain
>> algorithms much easier and they also perform faster as the looping
>> is done in C).
> What's wrong with less(a,b), besides uglier syntax?
> I find a<b for a,b arrays returns an exception for me with Numeric
Does less(a,b) return an array or a number under old versions? I just
More information about the Python-list