[SciPy-User] Least-squares fittings with bounds: why is scipy not up to the task?
Sat Mar 10 11:12:56 CST 2012
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Pauli Virtanen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> 09.03.2012 22:13, Matthew Newville kirjoitti:
>> Well, I understand you don't necessarily consider yourself to be a scipy
>> dev, but I'll ask anyway: How many pull requests have been made, and
>> how many have been accepted? Perhaps I am not reading github's Pull
>> Request link correctly, but that seems to indicate that the numbers are
>> 17 and 0. Surely, those cannot be correct. Unless I am counting
>> wrong, 5 of the 17 (total? outstanding?) pull requests listed for
>> scipy/scipy involve optimization.
> Wrong: 17 open, 99 accepted.
>> Well, there was a discussion "Alternative to scipy.optimize" in the past
>> two weeks on scipy-users that mentioned lmfit, and several over the past
>> several months, and apparently requests about mpfit in the more distant
>> past. And yet two scipy contributers (according to github's list, I am
>> counting you) responded to the original request for features **exactly
>> like lmfit** with something reading an awful lot like "Well, you'll have
>> to write one". Perhaps insular is not a fair characterization -- how
>> would you characterize that?
> Come on. The correct characterization is just: "busy". I did not
> remember that your project existed as it was announced half a year ago
> with no proposal that it should be integrated, and did not read the
> recent thread on scipy-user.
just as a reminder there is also https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/90
openopt started out as a scikits.
It doesn't look easy to me to come up with an interface to optimizers
that satisfy "all" use cases.
(and there is only one Pauli)
> Pauli Virtanen
> SciPy-User mailing list
More information about the SciPy-User