> > A related discussion is about a special Ones type representing an array > of 1, which would allow efficient generic implementations of > (non-)weighted statistical functions: > https://github.com/JuliaStats/StatsBase.jl/issues/135 > > But regarding zeros(), there might not be any compelling use case to > return a special type. Anyway, if arrays are changed to initialize to > zero [1], that function go could away entirely
lol never thought of this kind of special case. You could simply have a "SameVector" object that just stores the value and the length. * + - ^ would be easy to define and the space/(# of operations) savings could be massive ;). With this you would have no need to special case zeros(n) either just have it return a SameVector with value 0. We could even generalize it to "BlockVector" for sequences of same values storing start and stop locations.
