[Numpy-discussion] Custom Dtype/Units discussion

[Nathaniel Smith]

I have something at lunch, so dinner would be good for me too.
On Jul 13, 2016 7:46 PM, "Charles R Harris" <charlesr.harris at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Evening would work for me. Dinner?
> On Jul 13, 2016 2:43 PM, "Ryan May" <rmay31 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Chris Barker <chris.barker at noaa.gov>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 8:12 PM, Nathan Goldbaum <nathan12343 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe this can be an informal BOF session?
>>>>
>>>
>>> or  maybe a formal BoF? after all, how formal do they get?
>>>
>>> Anyway, it was my understanding that we really needed to do some
>>> significant refactoring of how numpy deals with dtypes in order to do this
>>> kind of thing cleanly -- so where has that gone since last year?
>>>
>>> Maybe this conversation should be about how to build a more flexible
>>> dtype system generally, rather than specifically about unit support.
>>> (though unit support is a great use-case to focus on)
>>>
>>>
>> So Thursday's options seem to be in the standard BOF slot (up against the
>> Numfocus BOF), or doing something that evening, which would overlap at
>> least part of multiple happy hour events. I lean towards evening. Thoughts?
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>> --
>> Ryan May
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
>> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
>> https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
> https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20160714/cabbd232/attachment.html>