On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Marten van Kerkwijk < m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > We tend to avoid adding methods. 2) would be a very easy enhancement, > just a slight modification of sqr. > > Did you mean `np.square`? Sadly, that doesn't do the right thing: > `np.square(1+1j)` yields `2j`, while one wants `c*c.conj()` and thus `2`. > Or, for fastest speed, really just `c.real**2 + c.imag**2`. > Yes, I meant the new function could made by reusing the square code with slight modifications. > My guess would be that a new ufunc, say `np.abs2` or `np.modulus2` or so, > would be more appropriate than defining a new method. I'd also be hesitant > to define a new private method -- I like how those usually are just used to > override python basics. > Julia uses abs2. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
