Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
Hi, Le 23/02/2013 20:25, Nathaniel Smith a écrit : My gut feeling is that we have too many methods on ndarray, not too few, but in any case, can you elaborate? What's the rationale for why np.abs(a) is so much harder than a.abs(), and why this function and not other unary functions? (Just another usecase where I see the x.abs() notation useful) If x is a complex array, I feel that x.abs() and x.angle() would be natural complements to x.real and x.imag. Of course, x.angle() only make much sense for complex arrays while x.abs() makes sense for any numerical array. best, Pierre signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Sebastian Berg sebast...@sipsolutions.net
wrote:
On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 22:04 -0500, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 9:58 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Sebastian Berg
sebast...@sipsolutions.net wrote:
On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 10:50 -0500, Skipper Seabold wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de
wrote:
First, sorry that i didnt search for an old thread, but because i
disagree with
conclusion i would at least address my reason:
snip
Two small things (not sure if it matters much). But first almost all
of
these methods are related to the container and not the elements.
Second
actually using a method arr.abs() has a tiny pitfall, since abs would
work on numpy types, but not on python types. This means that:
np.array([1, 2, 3]).max().abs()
works, but
np.array([1, 2, 3], dtype=object).max().abs()
breaks. Python has a safe name for abs already...
(np.array([1, 2, 3], dtype=object)).max()
3
(np.array([1, 2, 3], dtype=object)).__abs__().max()
3
(np.array([1, 2, '3'], dtype=object)).__abs__()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File stdin, line 1, in module
TypeError: bad operand type for abs(): 'str'
map(abs, [1, 2, 3])
[1, 2, 3]
map(abs, [1, 2, '3'])
Traceback (most recent call last):
File stdin, line 1, in module
TypeError: bad operand type for abs(): 'str'
or maybe more useful
from decimal import Decimal
d = [Decimal(str(k)) for k in np.linspace(-1, 1, 5)]
map(abs, d)
[Decimal('1.0'), Decimal('0.5'), Decimal('0.0'), Decimal('0.5'),
Decimal('1.0')]
np.asarray(d).__abs__()
array([1.0, 0.5, 0.0, 0.5, 1.0], dtype=object)
np.asarray(d).__abs__()[0]
Decimal('1.0')
Josef
I don't see a difference.
(I don't expect to use max abs on anything else than numbers.)
The difference is about scalars only. And of course __abs__ is fine, but
if numpy adds an abs method, its scalars would logically have it too.
But then you diverge from python scalars. That has exactly the downside
that you may write code that suddenly stops working for python scalars
without noticing.
I turned around the abs and max order here, so that the abs works on the
scalar, not useful but just as an example.
But doesn't this also apply to many existing methods?
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: Hello, i know that the array object is already crowded, but i would like to see the abs method added, especially doing work on the console. Considering that many much less used functions are also implemented as a method, i don't think adding one more would be problematic. My gut feeling is that we have too many methods on ndarray, not too few, but in any case, can you elaborate? What's the rationale for why np.abs(a) is so much harder than a.abs(), and why this function and not other unary functions? Or even abs(a). Well, that just calls a method: In [1]: ones(3).__abs__() Out[1]: array([ 1., 1., 1.]) Which shows the advantage of methods, they provide universal function hooks. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. It does not appear to be relevant to adding an ndarray.abs() method. -- Robert Kern ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
First, sorry that i didnt search for an old thread, but because i disagree with conclusion i would at least address my reason: I don't like np.abs(arr).max() because I have to concentrate to much on the braces, especially if arr is a calculation This exactly, adding an abs into an old expression is always a little annoyance due to the parenthesis. The argument that np.abs() also works is true for (almost?) every other method. The fact that so many methods already exists, especially for most of the commonly used functions (min, max, dot, mean, std, argmin, argmax, conj, T) makes me missing abs. Of course, if one would redesign the api, one would drop most methods (i am looking at you ptp and byteswap). But the objected is already cluttered and adding abs is imo logical application of practicality beats purity. greetings Till ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Benjamin Root ben.r...@ou.edu wrote: My issue is having to remember which ones are methods and which ones are functions. There doesn't seem to be a rhyme or reason for the choices, and I would rather like to see that a line is drawn, but I am not picky as to where it is drawn. I like that. I think it would be a good idea to find a good line for NumPy 2.0. As we already will break the API, why not break it for another part at the same time. I don't have any idea what would be a good line... Do someone have a good idea? Do you agree that it would be a good idea for 2.0? Fred ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: First, sorry that i didnt search for an old thread, but because i disagree with conclusion i would at least address my reason: I don't like np.abs(arr).max() because I have to concentrate to much on the braces, especially if arr is a calculation This exactly, adding an abs into an old expression is always a little annoyance due to the parenthesis. The argument that np.abs() also works is true for (almost?) every other method. The fact that so many methods already exists, especially for most of the commonly used functions (min, max, dot, mean, std, argmin, argmax, conj, T) makes me missing abs. Of course, if one would redesign the api, one would drop most methods (i am looking at you ptp and byteswap). But the objected is already cluttered and adding abs is imo logical application of practicality beats purity. I tend to agree here. The situation isn't all that dire for the number of methods in an array. No scrolling at reasonably small terminal sizes. [~/] [3]: x. x.T x.copy x.getfield x.put x.std x.all x.ctypesx.imag x.ravel x.strides x.any x.cumprod x.item x.real x.sum x.argmaxx.cumsumx.itemset x.repeatx.swapaxes x.argminx.data x.itemsize x.reshape x.take x.argsort x.diagonal x.max x.resizex.tofile x.astypex.dot x.mean x.round x.tolist x.base x.dtype x.min x.searchsorted x.tostring x.byteswap x.dump x.nbytesx.setfield x.trace x.choosex.dumps x.ndim x.setflags x.transpose x.clip x.fill x.newbyteorder x.shape x.var x.compress x.flags x.nonzero x.size x.view x.conj x.flat x.prod x.sort x.conjugate x.flatten x.ptp x.squeeze I find myself typing things like arr.abs() and arr.unique() quite often. Skipper ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: Hello, i know that the array object is already crowded, but i would like to see the abs method added, especially doing work on the console. Considering that many much less used functions are also implemented as a method, i don't think adding one more would be problematic. My gut feeling is that we have too many methods on ndarray, not too few, but in any case, can you elaborate? What's the rationale for why np.abs(a) is so much harder than a.abs(), and why this function and not other unary functions? Or even abs(a). Well, that just calls a method: In [1]: ones(3).__abs__() Out[1]: array([ 1., 1., 1.]) Which shows the advantage of methods, they provide universal function hooks. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: Hello, i know that the array object is already crowded, but i would like to see the abs method added, especially doing work on the console. Considering that many much less used functions are also implemented as a method, i don't think adding one more would be problematic. My gut feeling is that we have too many methods on ndarray, not too few, but in any case, can you elaborate? What's the rationale for why np.abs(a) is so much harder than a.abs(), and why this function and not other unary functions? Or even abs(a). Well, that just calls a method: In [1]: ones(3).__abs__() Out[1]: array([ 1., 1., 1.]) Which shows the advantage of methods, they provide universal function hooks. Maybe we should start to advertise magic methods. I only recently discovered I can use divmod instead of the numpy functions: divmod(np.array([1.4]), 1) (array([ 1.]), array([ 0.4])) np.array([1.4]).__divmod__(1) (array([ 1.]), array([ 0.4])) Josef Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 7:49 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: Hello, i know that the array object is already crowded, but i would like to see the abs method added, especially doing work on the console. Considering that many much less used functions are also implemented as a method, i don't think adding one more would be problematic. My gut feeling is that we have too many methods on ndarray, not too few, but in any case, can you elaborate? What's the rationale for why np.abs(a) is so much harder than a.abs(), and why this function and not other unary functions? Or even abs(a). Well, that just calls a method: In [1]: ones(3).__abs__() Out[1]: array([ 1., 1., 1.]) Which shows the advantage of methods, they provide universal function hooks. Maybe we should start to advertise magic methods. I only recently discovered I can use divmod instead of the numpy functions: divmod(np.array([1.4]), 1) (array([ 1.]), array([ 0.4])) np.array([1.4]).__divmod__(1) (array([ 1.]), array([ 0.4])) Thanks for the hint. my new favorite :) (freq - nobs * probs).__abs__().max() 132.0 Josef Josef Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 10:50 -0500, Skipper Seabold wrote: On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: First, sorry that i didnt search for an old thread, but because i disagree with conclusion i would at least address my reason: I don't like np.abs(arr).max() because I have to concentrate to much on the braces, especially if arr is a calculation This exactly, adding an abs into an old expression is always a little annoyance due to the parenthesis. The argument that np.abs() also works is true for (almost?) every other method. The fact that so many methods already exists, especially for most of the commonly used functions (min, max, dot, mean, std, argmin, argmax, conj, T) makes me missing abs. Of course, if one would redesign the api, one would drop most methods (i am looking at you ptp and byteswap). But the objected is already cluttered and adding abs is imo logical application of practicality beats purity. I tend to agree here. The situation isn't all that dire for the number of methods in an array. No scrolling at reasonably small terminal sizes. [~/] [3]: x. x.T x.copy x.getfield x.put x.std x.all x.ctypesx.imag x.ravel x.strides x.any x.cumprod x.item x.real x.sum x.argmaxx.cumsumx.itemset x.repeat x.swapaxes x.argminx.data x.itemsize x.reshape x.take x.argsort x.diagonal x.max x.resize x.tofile x.astypex.dot x.mean x.round x.tolist x.base x.dtype x.min x.searchsorted x.tostring x.byteswap x.dump x.nbytesx.setfield x.trace x.choosex.dumps x.ndim x.setflags x.transpose x.clip x.fill x.newbyteorder x.shape x.var x.compress x.flags x.nonzero x.size x.view x.conj x.flat x.prod x.sort x.conjugate x.flatten x.ptp x.squeeze Two small things (not sure if it matters much). But first almost all of these methods are related to the container and not the elements. Second actually using a method arr.abs() has a tiny pitfall, since abs would work on numpy types, but not on python types. This means that: np.array([1, 2, 3]).max().abs() works, but np.array([1, 2, 3], dtype=object).max().abs() breaks. Python has a safe name for abs already... I find myself typing things like arr.abs() and arr.unique() quite often. Skipper ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Sebastian Berg sebast...@sipsolutions.net wrote: On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 10:50 -0500, Skipper Seabold wrote: On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: First, sorry that i didnt search for an old thread, but because i disagree with conclusion i would at least address my reason: I don't like np.abs(arr).max() because I have to concentrate to much on the braces, especially if arr is a calculation This exactly, adding an abs into an old expression is always a little annoyance due to the parenthesis. The argument that np.abs() also works is true for (almost?) every other method. The fact that so many methods already exists, especially for most of the commonly used functions (min, max, dot, mean, std, argmin, argmax, conj, T) makes me missing abs. Of course, if one would redesign the api, one would drop most methods (i am looking at you ptp and byteswap). But the objected is already cluttered and adding abs is imo logical application of practicality beats purity. I tend to agree here. The situation isn't all that dire for the number of methods in an array. No scrolling at reasonably small terminal sizes. [~/] [3]: x. x.T x.copy x.getfield x.put x.std x.all x.ctypesx.imag x.ravel x.strides x.any x.cumprod x.item x.real x.sum x.argmaxx.cumsumx.itemset x.repeat x.swapaxes x.argminx.data x.itemsize x.reshape x.take x.argsort x.diagonal x.max x.resize x.tofile x.astypex.dot x.mean x.round x.tolist x.base x.dtype x.min x.searchsorted x.tostring x.byteswap x.dump x.nbytesx.setfield x.trace x.choosex.dumps x.ndim x.setflags x.transpose x.clip x.fill x.newbyteorder x.shape x.var x.compress x.flags x.nonzero x.size x.view x.conj x.flat x.prod x.sort x.conjugate x.flatten x.ptp x.squeeze Two small things (not sure if it matters much). But first almost all of these methods are related to the container and not the elements. Second actually using a method arr.abs() has a tiny pitfall, since abs would work on numpy types, but not on python types. This means that: np.array([1, 2, 3]).max().abs() works, but np.array([1, 2, 3], dtype=object).max().abs() breaks. Python has a safe name for abs already... (np.array([1, 2, 3], dtype=object)).max() 3 (np.array([1, 2, 3], dtype=object)).__abs__().max() 3 (np.array([1, 2, '3'], dtype=object)).__abs__() Traceback (most recent call last): File stdin, line 1, in module TypeError: bad operand type for abs(): 'str' map(abs, [1, 2, 3]) [1, 2, 3] map(abs, [1, 2, '3']) Traceback (most recent call last): File stdin, line 1, in module TypeError: bad operand type for abs(): 'str' I don't see a difference. (I don't expect to use max abs on anything else than numbers.) Josef I find myself typing things like arr.abs() and arr.unique() quite often. Skipper ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 9:58 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Sebastian Berg
sebast...@sipsolutions.net wrote:
On Mon, 2013-02-25 at 10:50 -0500, Skipper Seabold wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de
wrote:
First, sorry that i didnt search for an old thread, but because i
disagree with
conclusion i would at least address my reason:
I don't like
np.abs(arr).max()
because I have to concentrate to much on the braces, especially if
arr
is a calculation
This exactly, adding an abs into an old expression is always a
little annoyance
due to the parenthesis. The argument that np.abs() also works is
true for
(almost?) every other method. The fact that so many methods already
exists,
especially for most of the commonly used functions (min, max, dot,
mean, std,
argmin, argmax, conj, T) makes me missing abs. Of course, if one
would redesign
the api, one would drop most methods (i am looking at you ptp and
byteswap). But
the objected is already cluttered and adding abs is imo logical
application of
practicality beats purity.
I tend to agree here. The situation isn't all that dire for the number
of methods in an array. No scrolling at reasonably small terminal
sizes.
[~/]
[3]: x.
x.T x.copy x.getfield x.put x.std
x.all x.ctypesx.imag x.ravel
x.strides
x.any x.cumprod x.item x.real x.sum
x.argmaxx.cumsumx.itemset x.repeat
x.swapaxes
x.argminx.data x.itemsize x.reshape x.take
x.argsort x.diagonal x.max x.resize
x.tofile
x.astypex.dot x.mean x.round
x.tolist
x.base x.dtype x.min x.searchsorted
x.tostring
x.byteswap x.dump x.nbytesx.setfield
x.trace
x.choosex.dumps x.ndim x.setflags
x.transpose
x.clip x.fill x.newbyteorder x.shape x.var
x.compress x.flags x.nonzero x.size x.view
x.conj x.flat x.prod x.sort
x.conjugate x.flatten x.ptp x.squeeze
Two small things (not sure if it matters much). But first almost all of
these methods are related to the container and not the elements. Second
actually using a method arr.abs() has a tiny pitfall, since abs would
work on numpy types, but not on python types. This means that:
np.array([1, 2, 3]).max().abs()
works, but
np.array([1, 2, 3], dtype=object).max().abs()
breaks. Python has a safe name for abs already...
(np.array([1, 2, 3], dtype=object)).max()
3
(np.array([1, 2, 3], dtype=object)).__abs__().max()
3
(np.array([1, 2, '3'], dtype=object)).__abs__()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File stdin, line 1, in module
TypeError: bad operand type for abs(): 'str'
map(abs, [1, 2, 3])
[1, 2, 3]
map(abs, [1, 2, '3'])
Traceback (most recent call last):
File stdin, line 1, in module
TypeError: bad operand type for abs(): 'str'
or maybe more useful
from decimal import Decimal
d = [Decimal(str(k)) for k in np.linspace(-1, 1, 5)]
map(abs, d)
[Decimal('1.0'), Decimal('0.5'), Decimal('0.0'), Decimal('0.5'), Decimal('1.0')]
np.asarray(d).__abs__()
array([1.0, 0.5, 0.0, 0.5, 1.0], dtype=object)
np.asarray(d).__abs__()[0]
Decimal('1.0')
Josef
I don't see a difference.
(I don't expect to use max abs on anything else than numbers.)
Josef
I find myself typing things like
arr.abs()
and
arr.unique()
quite often.
Skipper
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: Hello, i know that the array object is already crowded, but i would like to see the abs method added, especially doing work on the console. Considering that many much less used functions are also implemented as a method, i don't think adding one more would be problematic. My gut feeling is that we have too many methods on ndarray, not too few, but in any case, can you elaborate? What's the rationale for why np.abs(a) is so much harder than a.abs(), and why this function and not other unary functions? -n ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: Hello, i know that the array object is already crowded, but i would like to see the abs method added, especially doing work on the console. Considering that many much less used functions are also implemented as a method, i don't think adding one more would be problematic. My gut feeling is that we have too many methods on ndarray, not too few, but in any case, can you elaborate? What's the rationale for why np.abs(a) is so much harder than a.abs(), and why this function and not other unary functions? IIRC, there was a long thread about adding 'abs' back around 1.0.3-1.1.0 with Travis against it ;) I don't feel strongly one way or the other. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: Hello, i know that the array object is already crowded, but i would like to see the abs method added, especially doing work on the console. Considering that many much less used functions are also implemented as a method, i don't think adding one more would be problematic. My gut feeling is that we have too many methods on ndarray, not too few, but in any case, can you elaborate? What's the rationale for why np.abs(a) is so much harder than a.abs(), and why this function and not other unary functions? Or even abs(a). -- Robert Kern ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: Hello, i know that the array object is already crowded, but i would like to see the abs method added, especially doing work on the console. Considering that many much less used functions are also implemented as a method, i don't think adding one more would be problematic. My gut feeling is that we have too many methods on ndarray, not too few, but in any case, can you elaborate? What's the rationale for why np.abs(a) is so much harder than a.abs(), and why this function and not other unary functions? Or even abs(a). my reason is that I often use arr.max() but then decide I want to us abs and need np.max(np.abs(arr)) instead of arr.abs().max() (and often I write that first to see the error message) I don't like np.abs(arr).max() because I have to concentrate to much on the braces, especially if arr is a calculation I wrote several times def maxabs(arr): return np.max(np.abs(arr)) silly, but I use it often and np.is_close is not useful (doesn't show how close) Just a small annoyance, but I think it's the method that I miss most often. Josef -- Robert Kern ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Re: [Numpy-discussion] Adding .abs() method to the array object
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 8:20 PM, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Robert Kern robert.k...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Nathaniel Smith n...@pobox.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Till Stensitzki mail.t...@gmx.de wrote: Hello, i know that the array object is already crowded, but i would like to see the abs method added, especially doing work on the console. Considering that many much less used functions are also implemented as a method, i don't think adding one more would be problematic. My gut feeling is that we have too many methods on ndarray, not too few, but in any case, can you elaborate? What's the rationale for why np.abs(a) is so much harder than a.abs(), and why this function and not other unary functions? Or even abs(a). my reason is that I often use arr.max() but then decide I want to us abs and need np.max(np.abs(arr)) instead of arr.abs().max() (and often I write that first to see the error message) I don't like np.abs(arr).max() because I have to concentrate to much on the braces, especially if arr is a calculation I wrote several times def maxabs(arr): return np.max(np.abs(arr)) silly, but I use it often and np.is_close is not useful (doesn't show how close) Just a small annoyance, but I think it's the method that I miss most often. Josef My issue is having to remember which ones are methods and which ones are functions. There doesn't seem to be a rhyme or reason for the choices, and I would rather like to see that a line is drawn, but I am not picky as to where it is drawn. Ben Root ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
