On 2/3/10 6:23 PM, B.A.D.C.M.D Santos wrote:
> ?! phyper is deterministic, I think. Calling it with the same parameters
> will give the same results.
>
> Good point, that it is in fact an excellent improvement. I will start
> storing everything already computed on a dictionary.
Avoiding to recompu
?! phyper is deterministic, I think. Calling it with the same parameters
will give the same results.
Good point, that it is in fact an excellent improvement. I will start
storing everything already computed on a dictionary.
Anyway I was able to easily solve the problem with the mapping by addin
On 2/3/10 3:00 PM, B.A.D.C.M.D Santos wrote:
> The main reason I was trying to move to the low level interface is
> speed. So what I am doing is calculating several times the p-value for
> the same python object.
?! phyper is deterministic, I think. Calling it with the same parameters
will give t
The main reason I was trying to move to the low level interface is speed.
So what I am doing is calculating several times the p-value for the same
python object. So I bind phyper to the object and then just perform the
test several times. This already improved the speed a lot, compared to
simpl
On 2/3/10 12:32 PM, B.A.D.C.M.D Santos wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> Today I was trying to port my phyper from the high-level interface to the
> low-level interface. My problem is again how I map the arguments with dot.
> According to the documentation I should be able to use the special **Kwargs
> aga
Hello again,
Today I was trying to port my phyper from the high-level interface to the
low-level interface. My problem is again how I map the arguments with dot.
According to the documentation I should be able to use the special **Kwargs
again. But I have no idea how to do this. I tried directl
