I was thinking (1) (special-case range()); however (2) may be more generally applicable and useful.
Antony 2016-02-14 6:36 GMT-08:00 Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com>: > > > On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Antony Lee <antony....@berkeley.edu> > wrote: > >> re: no reason why... >> This has nothing to do with Python2/Python3 (I personally stopped using >> Python2 at least 3 years ago.) Let me put it this way instead: if >> Python3's "range" (or Python2's "xrange") was not a builtin type but a type >> provided by numpy, I don't think it would be controversial at all to >> provide an `__array__` special method to efficiently convert it to a >> ndarray. It would be the same if `np.array` used a >> `functools.singledispatch` dispatcher rather than an `__array__` special >> method (which is obviously not possible for chronological reasons). >> >> re: iterable vs iterator: check for the presence of the __next__ special >> method (or isinstance(x, Iterable) vs. isinstance(x, Iterator) and not >> isinstance(x, Iterable)) >> > > I think it's good to do something about this, but it's not clear what the > exact proposal is. I could image one or both of: > > - special-case the range() object in array (and asarray/asanyarray?) > such that array(range(N)) becomes as fast as arange(N). > - special-case all iterators, such that array(range(N)) becomes as fast > as deque(range(N)) > > or yet something else? > > Ralf > > > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
