Does this mean, we could do something like this? a = 3 a = array(a) a[ a<4 ] = 5
If so, that would be great! Mark On Mar 29, 9:20 pm, Travis Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > Ticket #474 discusses the problem that getting a field from a 0-d array > automatically produces a scalar (which then cannot be set). > This produces the problem that recarrays code must often special-case > the 0-d possibility. > > Thus, > > rarr.x[...] = blah > > doesn't work for 0-d arrays because rarr.x is a scalar. > > It makes some sense to make field selection for 0-d arrays return 0-d > arrays as consistent with the changes that were made prior to the 1.0 > release to allow persistence of 0-d arrays. > > However, changing field selection to return 0-d arrays does change > behavior. A 0-d array is not a scalar (the 0-d array is not hashable > for example, and the 0-d string array does not inherit from the Python > string). Thus, just making the change, may not be advised. > > It is easy to account for and fix any errors that might arise. But, we > are in a major release, I need some advice as to whether or not this is > a "bug-fix" or a feature enhancement that must wait for 1.1? > > Any stake holders in the current behavior of arrays with records? > > -Travis > > _______________________________________________ > Numpy-discussion mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED]://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
