On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 18:15, Elaine Angelino <elaine.angel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well, what other recarray functionality are you using? > > None, in our code. We also thought that since at least some people like > using the attribute reference property, perhaps users of tabarrays might too > (though we don't personally in our own work) Recarrays still seemed to be > being supported by NumPy, so it seemed to make sense to use them. but the > only functional thing in our code are those constructors. Then I would suggest making tabarrays subclass from ndarray. If you like, provide a tabrecarray that subclasses from both recarray and tabarray so that people who like attribute access can .view() to their heart's content. >> > (Also, is first casting to recarrays and then viewing as ndarrays more >> > expensive than if we went through ndarray directly?) >> > > But if NumPy decided to include ndarray versions of the from*() constructors > in the distribution, would this be achieved by first using the recarray > constructor and then viewing as ndarray? Or would something more "direct" > be done? We would fix the functions to not do any unnecessary .view()s. -- 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://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
