Anne Archibald wrote:
> 2009/6/4 <josef.p...@gmail.com>:
>
>> intersect1d should throw a domain error if you give it arrays with
>> non-unique elements, which is not done for speed reasons
>
> It seems to me that this is the basic source of the problem. Perhaps
> this can be addressed? I realize maintaining compatibility with the
> current behaviour is necessary, so how about a multistage deprecation:
>
> 1. add a keyword argument to intersect1d "assume_unique"; if it is not
> present, check for uniqueness and emit a warning if not unique
> 2. change the warning to an exception
> Optionally:
> 3. change the meaning of the function to that of intersect1d_nu if the
> keyword argument is not present
>
> One could do something similar with setmember1d.
>
> This would remove the pitfall of the 1d assumption and the wart of the
> _nu names without hampering performance for people who know they have
> unique arrays and are in a hurry.
You mean something like:
def intersect1d(ar1, ar2, assume_unique=False):
if not assume_unique:
return intersect1d_nu(ar1, ar2)
else:
... # the current code
intersect1d_nu could be still exported to numpy namespace, or not.
I like this. I do not undestand, however, what you mean by "remove the
pitfall of the 1d assumption"?
cheers,
r.
_______________________________________________
Numpy-discussion mailing list
Numpy-discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
