On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 03:22, Stéfan van der Walt <ste...@sun.ac.za> wrote: > Hi Robert > > 2009/2/6 Robert Kern <robert.k...@gmail.com>: >>> This could be implemented but would require adding information to the >>> NumPy array. >> >> More than that, though. Every function and method that takes an axis >> or reduces an axis will need to be rewritten. For that reason, I'm -1 >> on the proposal. > > Are you -1 on the array dictionary, or on using it to do axis mapping?
I'm -1 on rewriting every axis= argument to accept strings. I'm +1 on a generic metadata dict that does not implicitly propagate. > I would imagine that Gael would be happier even if he had to do > > axis = x.meta.axis['Lateral'] > some_func(x, axis) That's fine with me. >> I'm of the opinion that it should never guess. We have no idea what >> semantics are being placed on the dict. Even in the case where all of >> the inputs have the same dict, the operation may easily invalidate the >> metadata. For example, a reduction on one of these axis-decorated >> arrays would make the axis labels incorrect. > > That's a good point. So what would be a sane way of propagating > meta-data? If we don't want to make any assumptions, it becomes the > user's responsibility to do it manually. I don't think there is *any* sane way of numpy propagating the user's metadata. The user must be the one to do it. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion