[SciPy-Dev] cephes_smirnov never returns on mips/sparc/...

josef.pktd@gmai... josef.pktd@gmai...
Fri Mar 30 22:06:46 CDT 2012

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko
<lists@onerussian.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2012, josef.pktd@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> so next I guess is to make it return sensible values for the .fit as it did
>> >> before? ;)
>> > sensible? or starting values?
> if starting values are the most sensible -- then yeap -- them ;)
> if I ask to 'fit' something, getting some fit is better than getting no
> fit (as NaNs in output suggest)

getting the starting values back doesn't mean that you have "some" fit.

If my brief playing with it today is correct, then the starting values
don't make sense, for example you have points outside of the support
of the distribution with estimated parameters (if you have negative
values in the sample)
NaN would be better, then at least you know it doesn't make sense.

If you just want some local maximum, then setting
start_value/_fitstart for loc and scale corresponding to the actual
support of the sample would help. I have no idea about good starting
values for the shape parameter (n is sample size for kstest)

But what's the point in fitting ksone?


>> Sorry if Debian is getting some noise from my side today. I have
>> problems paying attention to reply versus reply-all.
> well -- it was my fault anyways trying to kill two birds at once  ;)
> Debian BTS would survive that just fine, no worries -- even might
> appreciate having more context for the report ;)
> --
> =------------------------------------------------------------------=
> Keep in touch                                     www.onerussian.com
> Yaroslav Halchenko                 www.ohloh.net/accounts/yarikoptic
> _______________________________________________
> SciPy-Dev mailing list
> SciPy-Dev@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev

More information about the SciPy-Dev mailing list