> On 15/04/2008, Alan G Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I thought the context of the discussion had become something >> like this: there is no reason for the matrix interface to >> deviate from the array interface except as needed to provide >> specific desired functionality. Essentially,
>> - matrix multiplication >> - powers of square matrices >> - submatrix creation >> The proposal on the table is to remove an unneeded (and >> unwanted) deviation of the matrix API from the ndarray API. >> That is all. On Tue, 15 Apr 2008, Stéfan van der Walt apparently wrote: > Unless my memory fails me (again), this would result in > another deviation from numpy: that x[0] no longer returns > the first row of any 2D array (matrix), especially when > dealing with matrices of shape of (1,N). Either I do not understand you, or this is not correct, or... Anyway, for matrix x, x[0] should be the same as the current x.A[0] > The whole issue occurs because a Matrix is not a proper > container. Right. And *that* is the case because of the attempt to treat matrices as containers of matrices instead of as containers of 1d arrays. I can see no real advantage to having matrices be containers of row vectors instead. A row vector would just be a matrix (i.e., essentially 2d) that allowed 1d style indexing. Again I ask, have you ever needed such a thing? > My favorite quote in these threads so far has to be by Charles Harris: > "All this for want of an operator ;)" I agree this is a good perspective. (But *two* operators: * and **.) It implies: there are deviations from array behavior that are buying us nothing. This is my point. Cheers, Alan _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion