On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 4:34 AM, Sebastian Berg
<sebast...@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> On Mi, 2016-07-06 at 15:30 -0400, Benjamin Root wrote:
>> I don't see how one could define a spec that would take an arbitrary
>> array of indices at which to place new dimensions. By definition, you
>>
>
> You just give a reordered range, so that (1, 0, 2) would be the current
> 3D version. If 1D, fill in `1` and `2`, if 2D, fill in only `2` (0D,
> add everything of course).
I was originally thinking (-1, 0) for the 2D case. Just go along the
list and fill as many dims as necessary. Your way is much better since
it does not require a different operation for positive and negative
indices.
> However, I have my doubts that it is actually easier to understand then
> to write yourself ;).
A dictionary or ragged list would be better for that: either {1: (1,
0), 2: (2,)} or [(1, 0), (2,)]. The first is more clear since the
index in the list is the starting ndim - 1.
>
> - Sebastian
>
>
>> don't know how many dimensions are going to be added. If you knew,
>> then you wouldn't be calling this function. I can only imagine simple
>> rules such as 'left' or 'right' or maybe something akin to what
>> at_least3d() implements.
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Joseph Fox-Rabinovitz <jfoxrabinovitz
>> @gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Eric Firing <efir...@hawaii.edu>
>> > wrote:
>> > > On 2016/07/06 8:25 AM, Benjamin Root wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> I wouldn't have the keyword be "where", as that collides with
>> > the notion
>> > >> of "where" elsewhere in numpy.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Agreed. Maybe "side"?
>> >
>> > I have tentatively changed it to "pos". The reason that I don't
>> > like
>> > "side" is that it implies only a subset of the possible ways that
>> > that
>> > the position of the new dimensions can be specified. The current
>> > implementation only puts things on one side or the other, but I
>> > have
>> > considered also allowing an array of indices at which to place new
>> > dimensions, and/or a dictionary keyed by the starting ndims. I do
>> > not
>> > think "side" would be appropriate for these extended cases, even if
>> > they are very unlikely to ever materialize.
>> >
>> > -Joe
>> >
>> > > (I find atleast_1d and atleast_2d to be very helpful for handling
>> > inputs, as
>> > > Ben noted; I'm skeptical as to the value of atleast_3d and
>> > atleast_nd.)
>> > >
>> > > Eric
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > 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
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
