Hey Travis! 2009/3/13 Travis E. Oliphant <oliph...@enthought.com>: > Referencing my previous post on this topic. In this case, it is > unambiguous to replace dimensions 1 and 2 with the result of > broadcasting idx and idx together. Thus the (5,6) dimensions is > replaced by the (2,) result of indexing leaving the outer dimensions > in-tact, thus (4,2,7) is the result. > > I could be persuaded that this attempt to differentiate "unambiguous" > from "ambiguous" sub-space replacements was mis-guided and we should > have stuck with the simpler rule expressed above. But, it seemed so > aesthetically pleasing to swap-out the indexed sub-space when it was > possible to do it.
Thank you for the explanation! It makes sense, intuitively, it is just hard to explain all these rules to newcomers. It also makes it a bit more difficult to tell a machine how to interpret the result of an indexing operation. Are we too far down the road to change this behaviour? I guess some code may already depend on it. Have a great Friday, Stéfan _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
