On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Bill Baxter apparently wrote: > Here's another possible now or never change: > fix rand(), eye(), ones(), zeros(), and empty() to ALL take either a tuple > argument or plain list. > I know this has been discussed before, but I really don't > see why these methods can't be overloaded to accept either > one.
I think the discussion has been slightly different than this. The "numpy way" for array creation is generally to specify dimension as tuples. A small number of functions violate this, which is an unhappy inconsistency. Specifically, rand() and randn() violate this. (Perhaps one could also say that eye() violates this; I do not yet have an opinion.) I argue that rand and randn should accept a tuple as the first argument. Whether the old behavior is also allowed, I have no opinion. But the numpy-consistent behavior should definitely be allowed. I perhaps wrongly understood Robert to argue that the current behavior of rand and randn is not a wart since i. alternative tuple-accepting functions are available and ii. the suprising behavior is documented. This seems quite wrong to me, and I am farily confident that such an argument would not be offered except in defence of legacy code. In fact, I would argue that if rand and randn are not "fixed" to accept a tuple, then they should be moved into a compatability module and not be considered part of numpy. Cheers, Alan Isaac Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/numpy-discussion
