On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Daniele Nicolodi <dani...@grinta.net>wrote:
> On 18/01/2013 15:19, Benjamin Root wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:44 AM, Daniele Nicolodi <dani...@grinta.net > > <mailto:dani...@grinta.net>> wrote: > > > > On 17/01/2013 23:27, Mark Wiebe wrote: > > > Would it be too weird or clumsy to extend the empty and empty_like > > > functions to do the filling? > > > > > > np.empty((10, 10), fill=np.nan) > > > np.empty_like(my_arr, fill=np.nan) > > > > Wouldn't it be more natural to extend the ndarray constructor? > > > > np.ndarray((10, 10), fill=np.nan) > > > > It looks more natural to me. In this way it is not possible to have > the > > _like extension, but I don't see it as a major drawback. > > > > > > Cheers, > > Daniele > > > > > > This isn't a bad idea. Although, I would wager that most people, like > > myself, use np.array() and np.array_like() instead of np.ndarray(). We > > should also double-check and see how well that would fit in with the > > other contructors like masked arrays and matrix objects. > > Hello Ben, > > I don't really get what you mean with this. np.array() construct a numpy > array from an array-like object, np.ndarray() accepts a dimensions tuple > as first parameter, I don't see any np.array_like in the current numpy > release. > > Cheers, > Daniele > > My bad, I had a brain-fart and got mixed up. I was thinking of np.empty(). In fact, I never use np.ndarray(), I use np.empty(). Besides np.ndarray() being the actual constructor, what is the difference between them? Ben Root
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
