I'm not sure I understand the motivation here. Is the idea that you want to
reuse min/max values computed with keepdims that you also want to use for
other purposes?
If so, this could be achieved with squeeze(), e.g.,
np.linspace(
arr.min(axis=ax, keepdims=True).squeeze(ax),
arr.max(axis=ax, keepdims=True).squeeze(ax),
axis=ax,
)
This is not the most elegant code, but it seems better than adding a new
keyword argument, and the resulting code is likely about as efficient.
On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 11:54 AM Sebastian Berg <sebast...@sipsolutions.net>
wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 10:43 -0800, Zijie Poh wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We've created a PR (#14922) on
> > adding keepdims to linspace / logspace / geomspace, which
> > enables linspace to directly take the output
> > of min and max with keepdims = True as the start and stop arguments.
> > That is, the following two linspace calls return the same result.
> >
> > np.linspace(
> > arr.min(axis=ax),
> > arr.max(axis=ax),
> > axis=ax
> > )
> >
> > np.linspace(
> > arr.min(axis=ax, keepdims=True),
> > arr.max(axis=ax, keepdims=True),
> > axis=ax, keepdims=True
> > )
> >
>
> I am a bit hesitant about the name `keepdims` being the best one. I
> realize it is nice to have the pattern to use the same name for
> symmetry. But on the other hand, there is no axes being "kept" here. In
> fact, `keepdims=True` returns fewer dims than `keepdims=False` :).
>
> Not sure I have a better idea though, `expand_axis` (or axis) might be
> closer to what happens?
>
> `keepdims` is currently used entirely for reduction-like operations
> (including complex reduce-like behaviour in `percentile`). However, the
> closest to an opposite of reduce-like operations are maybe broadcasts
> (they expand axis), but I cannot think of a way to use that for a
> parameter name ;).
>
> The change itself is small enough and I am good with adding it, I have
> some doubts it will be used much. But it is like a very natural thing
> to give input with the same number of dimensions/axis as the output
> will have.
>
> Maybe we should have had `new_axis=` and `expand_axis=` and you can
> only use one ;).
>
> - Sebastian
>
>
> > Please let me know if you have any questions / suggestions.
> >
> > Regards,
> > ZJ
> > _______________________________________________
> > NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> > NumPy-Discussion@python.org
> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
