Welfare offer Sports football recommendation_free login william hill live chat_free login football betting sites uk

Sat, 18 Feb 2017 19:20:19 -0800

Hi everyone,

Thanks for this. It looks absolutely fantastic. I've been putting off using 
numexpr but it looks like I don't have a choice anymore. ;)

Regarding feature requests, I've always found it off putting that I have to 
wrap my expressions in a string to speed them up. Has anyone explored the 
possibility of using Python 3.6's frame evaluation API to do this? I remember a 
vague discussion on this list a while back but I don't know whether anything 
came of it.

Thanks!

Juan.

On 18 Feb 2017, 3:42 AM +1100, Robert McLeod <robbmcl...@gmail.com>, wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks for your comments, reply below the fold.
>
> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Da¦Đid <davidmen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > This is very nice indeed!
> > >
> > > On 17 February 2017 at 12:15, Robert McLeod <robbmcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > * bytes and unicode support
> > > > * reductions (mean, sum, prod, std)
> > >
> > > I use both a lot, maybe I can help you get them working.
> > >
> > > Also, regarding "Vectorization hasn't been done yet with cmath
> > > functions for real numbers (such as sqrt(), exp(), etc.), only for
> > > complex functions". What is the bottleneck? Is it in GCC or just
> > > someone has to sit down and adapt it?
> >
> > I just haven't done it yet.? Basically I'm moving from Switzerland to 
> > Canada in a week so this was the gap to push something out that's usable if 
> > not perfect. Rather I just import cmath functions, which are inlined but I 
> > suspect what's needed is to break them down into their components. For 
> > example, the complex arccos function looks like this:
> >
> > static void
> > nc_acos( npy_intp n, npy_complex64 *x, npy_complex64 *r)
> > {
> > ? ? npy_complex64 a;
> > ? ? for( npy_intp I = 0; I < n; I++ ) {
> > ? ? ? ? a = x[I];
> > ? ? ? ? _inline_mul( x[I], x[I], r[I] );
> > ? ? ? ? _inline_sub( Z_1, r[I], r[I] );
> > ? ? ? ? _inline_sqrt( r[I], r[I] );
> > ? ? ? ? _inline_muli( r[I], r[I] );
> > ? ? ? ? _inline_add( a, r[I], r[I] );
> > ? ? ? ? _inline_log( r[I] , r[I] );
> > ? ? ? ? _inline_muli( r[I], r[I] );
> > ? ? ? ? _inline_neg( r[I], r[I]);
> > ? ? }
> > }
> >
> > I haven't sat down and inspected whether the cmath versions get vectorized, 
> > but there's not a huge speed difference between NE2 and 3 for such a 
> > function on float (but their is for complex), so my suspicion is they 
> > aren't.? Another option would be to add a library such as Yeppp! as 
> > LIB_YEPPP or some other library that's faster than glib.? For example the 
> > glib function "fma(a,b,c)" is slower than doing "a*b+c" in NE3, and that's 
> > not how it should be.? Yeppp is also built with Python generating C code, 
> > so it could either be very easy or very hard.
> >
> > On bytes and unicode, I haven't seen examples for how people use it, so I'm 
> > not sure where to start. Since there's practically not a limitation on the 
> > number of operations now (the library is 1.3 MB now, compared to 1.2 MB for 
> > NE2 with gcc 5.4) the string functions could grow significantly from what 
> > we have in NE2.
> >
> > With regards to reductions, NumExpr never multi-threaded them, and could 
> > only do outer reductions, so in the end there was no speed advantage to be 
> > had compared to having NumPy do them on the result.? I suspect the primary 
> > value there was in PyTables and Pandas where the expression had to do 
> > everything.? One of the things I've moved away from in NE3 is doing output 
> > buffering (rather it pre-allocates the output array), so for reductions the 
> > understanding NumExpr has of broadcasting would have to be deeper.
> >
> > In any event contributions would certainly be welcome.
> >
> > Robert
> >
> --
> Robert McLeod, Ph.D.
> Center for Cellular Imaging and Nano Analytics (C-CINA)
> Biozentrum der Universit?t Basel
> Mattenstrasse 26, 4058 Basel
> Work: +41.061.387.3225
> robert.mcl...@unibas.ch
> robert.mcl...@bsse.ethz.ch
> robbmcl...@gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> free online bettinghttps://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Reply via email to