Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[josef . pktd]

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Joseph Martinot-Lagarde <
joseph.martinot-laga...@m4x.org> wrote:

> Le 18/07/2014 22:46, Chris Barker a écrit :
> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Joseph Martinot-Lagarde
> >  > > wrote:
> >
> > In addition,
> > you have to use AltGr on some keyboards to get the brackets.
> >
> >
> > If it's hard to type square brackets -- you're kind of dead in the water
> > with Python anyway -- this is not going to help.
> >
> > -Chris
> >
> Welcome to the azerty world ! ;)
>
> It's not that hard to type, just a bit more involved. My biggest problem
> is that you have to type the opening and closing bracket for each line,
> with a comma in between. It will always be harder and more error prone
> than a single semicolon, whatever the keyboard.
>
> My use case is not teaching but doing quick'n'dirty computations with a
> few values. Sometimes these values are copy-pasted from a space
> separated file, or from a printed array in another console. Having to
> add comas and bracket makes simple computations less easy. That's why I
> often use Octave for these.
>

my copy paste approaches for almost quick'n'dirty (no semicolons):

given:

a b c

1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8 9


(select & Ctrl-C)


>>> pandas.read_clipboard(sep=' ')

   a  b  c

0  1  2  3

1  4  5  6

2  7  8  9


>>> np.asarray(pandas.read_clipboard())

array([[1, 2, 3],

   [4, 5, 6],

   [7, 8, 9]], dtype=int64)


>>> pandas.read_clipboard().values

array([[1, 2, 3],

   [4, 5, 6],

   [7, 8, 9]], dtype=int64)


arr = np.array('''\

1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8 9'''.split(), float).reshape(-1, 3)


the last is not so quick and dirty but reusable and reused.


Josef





>
>
> ___
> 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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Joseph Martinot-Lagarde]

Le 18/07/2014 22:46, Chris Barker a écrit :
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Joseph Martinot-Lagarde
>  > wrote:
>
> In addition,
> you have to use AltGr on some keyboards to get the brackets.
>
>
> If it's hard to type square brackets -- you're kind of dead in the water
> with Python anyway -- this is not going to help.
>
> -Chris
>
Welcome to the azerty world ! ;)

It's not that hard to type, just a bit more involved. My biggest problem 
is that you have to type the opening and closing bracket for each line, 
with a comma in between. It will always be harder and more error prone 
than a single semicolon, whatever the keyboard.

My use case is not teaching but doing quick'n'dirty computations with a 
few values. Sometimes these values are copy-pasted from a space 
separated file, or from a printed array in another console. Having to 
add comas and bracket makes simple computations less easy. That's why I 
often use Octave for these.


___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Chris Barker]

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Joseph Martinot-Lagarde <
joseph.martinot-laga...@m4x.org> wrote:

> In addition,
> you have to use AltGr on some keyboards to get the brackets.


If it's hard to type square brackets -- you're kind of dead in the water
with Python anyway -- this is not going to help.

-Chris


-- 

Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R(206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115   (206) 526-6317   main reception

chris.bar...@noaa.gov
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[josef . pktd]

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Charles G. Waldman 
wrote:

> Joseph Martinot-Lagarde writes:
>
> > Compare what's comparable:
>
> That's fair.
>
> > In addition, you have to use AltGr on some keyboards to get the brackets
>
> Wow, it must be rather painful to do any real programming on such a
> keyboard!
>
>  - C
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Joseph Martinot-Lagarde
>  wrote:
> > Le 18/07/2014 20:42, Charles G. Waldman a écrit :
> >> Well, if the goal is "shorthand", typing numpy.array(numpy.mat())
> >> won't please many users.
> >>
> >> But the more I think about it, the less I think Numpy should support
> >> this (non-Pythonic) input mode.  Too much molly-coddling of new users!
> >> When doing interactive work I usually just type:
> >>
> > np.array([[1,2,3],
> >> ...   [4,5,6],
> >> ...   [7,8,9]])
> >>
> >> which is (IMO) easier to read:  e.g. it's not totally obvious that
> >> "1,0,0;0,1,0;0,0,1" represents a 3x3 identity matrix, but
> >>
> >> [[1,0,0],
> >>[0,1,0],
> >>[0,0,1]]
> >>
> >> is pretty obvious.
> >>
> > Compare what's comparable:
> >
> > [[1,0,0],
> >   [0,1,0],
> >   [0,0,1]]
> >
> > vs
> >
> > "1 0 0;"
> > "0 1 0;"
> > "0 0 1"
> >
> > or
> >
> > """
> > 1 0 0;
> > 0 1 0;
> > 0 0 1
> > """
> >
> > [[1,0,0], [0,1,0], [0,0,1]]
> > vs
> > "1 0 0; 0 1 0; 0 0 1"
> >
> >> The difference in (non-whitespace) chars is 19 vs 25, so the
> >> "shorthand" doesn't seem to save that much.
> >
> > Well, it's easier to type "" (twice the same character) than [], and you
> > have no risk in swapping en opening and a closing bracket. In addition,
> > you have to use AltGr on some keyboards to get the brackets. It doesn't
> > boils down to a number of characters.
> >
> >>
> >> Just my €0.02,
>


It's the year of the notebook.

notebooks are reusable.
notebooks correctly align the brackets in the second and third line
and it looks pretty, just like a matrix


(But, I don't have to teach newbies, and often I even correct whitespace on
the commandline, because it looks ugly and I will eventually copy it to a
script file.)

Josef
no broken windows!
well, except for the ones I don't feel like fixing right now.






> >>
> >> - C
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Alan G Isaac 
> wrote:
> >>> On 7/18/2014 12:45 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>  If the true goal is to just allow quick entry of a 2d array, why not
> just advocate using
>  a = numpy.array(numpy.mat("1 2 3; 4 5 6; 7 8 9"))
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> It's even simpler:
> >>> a = np.mat(' 1 2 3;4 5 6;7 8 9').A
> >>>
> >>> I'm not putting a dog in this race.  Still I would say that
> >>> the reason why such proposals miss the point is that
> >>> there are introductory settings where one would like
> >>> to explain as few complications as possible.  In
> >>> particular, one might prefer *not* to discuss the
> >>> existence of a matrix type.  As an additional downside,
> >>> this is only good for 2d, and there have been proposals
> >>> for the new array builder to handle other dimensions.
> >>>
> >>> fwiw,
> >>> Alan Isaac
> >>>
> >>> ___
> >>> 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
> ___
> 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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Charles G. Waldman]

Joseph Martinot-Lagarde writes:

> Compare what's comparable:

That's fair.

> In addition, you have to use AltGr on some keyboards to get the brackets

Wow, it must be rather painful to do any real programming on such a keyboard!

 - C


On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Joseph Martinot-Lagarde
 wrote:
> Le 18/07/2014 20:42, Charles G. Waldman a écrit :
>> Well, if the goal is "shorthand", typing numpy.array(numpy.mat())
>> won't please many users.
>>
>> But the more I think about it, the less I think Numpy should support
>> this (non-Pythonic) input mode.  Too much molly-coddling of new users!
>> When doing interactive work I usually just type:
>>
> np.array([[1,2,3],
>> ...   [4,5,6],
>> ...   [7,8,9]])
>>
>> which is (IMO) easier to read:  e.g. it's not totally obvious that
>> "1,0,0;0,1,0;0,0,1" represents a 3x3 identity matrix, but
>>
>> [[1,0,0],
>>[0,1,0],
>>[0,0,1]]
>>
>> is pretty obvious.
>>
> Compare what's comparable:
>
> [[1,0,0],
>   [0,1,0],
>   [0,0,1]]
>
> vs
>
> "1 0 0;"
> "0 1 0;"
> "0 0 1"
>
> or
>
> """
> 1 0 0;
> 0 1 0;
> 0 0 1
> """
>
> [[1,0,0], [0,1,0], [0,0,1]]
> vs
> "1 0 0; 0 1 0; 0 0 1"
>
>> The difference in (non-whitespace) chars is 19 vs 25, so the
>> "shorthand" doesn't seem to save that much.
>
> Well, it's easier to type "" (twice the same character) than [], and you
> have no risk in swapping en opening and a closing bracket. In addition,
> you have to use AltGr on some keyboards to get the brackets. It doesn't
> boils down to a number of characters.
>
>>
>> Just my €0.02,
>>
>> - C
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Alan G Isaac  wrote:
>>> On 7/18/2014 12:45 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
 If the true goal is to just allow quick entry of a 2d array, why not just 
 advocate using
 a = numpy.array(numpy.mat("1 2 3; 4 5 6; 7 8 9"))
>>>
>>>
>>> It's even simpler:
>>> a = np.mat(' 1 2 3;4 5 6;7 8 9').A
>>>
>>> I'm not putting a dog in this race.  Still I would say that
>>> the reason why such proposals miss the point is that
>>> there are introductory settings where one would like
>>> to explain as few complications as possible.  In
>>> particular, one might prefer *not* to discuss the
>>> existence of a matrix type.  As an additional downside,
>>> this is only good for 2d, and there have been proposals
>>> for the new array builder to handle other dimensions.
>>>
>>> fwiw,
>>> Alan Isaac
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Joseph Martinot-Lagarde]

Le 18/07/2014 20:42, Charles G. Waldman a écrit :
> Well, if the goal is "shorthand", typing numpy.array(numpy.mat())
> won't please many users.
>
> But the more I think about it, the less I think Numpy should support
> this (non-Pythonic) input mode.  Too much molly-coddling of new users!
> When doing interactive work I usually just type:
>
 np.array([[1,2,3],
> ...   [4,5,6],
> ...   [7,8,9]])
>
> which is (IMO) easier to read:  e.g. it's not totally obvious that
> "1,0,0;0,1,0;0,0,1" represents a 3x3 identity matrix, but
>
> [[1,0,0],
>[0,1,0],
>[0,0,1]]
>
> is pretty obvious.
>
Compare what's comparable:

[[1,0,0],
  [0,1,0],
  [0,0,1]]

vs

"1 0 0;"
"0 1 0;"
"0 0 1"

or

"""
1 0 0;
0 1 0;
0 0 1
"""

[[1,0,0], [0,1,0], [0,0,1]]
vs
"1 0 0; 0 1 0; 0 0 1"

> The difference in (non-whitespace) chars is 19 vs 25, so the
> "shorthand" doesn't seem to save that much.

Well, it's easier to type "" (twice the same character) than [], and you 
have no risk in swapping en opening and a closing bracket. In addition, 
you have to use AltGr on some keyboards to get the brackets. It doesn't 
boils down to a number of characters.

>
> Just my €0.02,
>
> - C
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Alan G Isaac  wrote:
>> On 7/18/2014 12:45 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>>> If the true goal is to just allow quick entry of a 2d array, why not just 
>>> advocate using
>>> a = numpy.array(numpy.mat("1 2 3; 4 5 6; 7 8 9"))
>>
>>
>> It's even simpler:
>> a = np.mat(' 1 2 3;4 5 6;7 8 9').A
>>
>> I'm not putting a dog in this race.  Still I would say that
>> the reason why such proposals miss the point is that
>> there are introductory settings where one would like
>> to explain as few complications as possible.  In
>> particular, one might prefer *not* to discuss the
>> existence of a matrix type.  As an additional downside,
>> this is only good for 2d, and there have been proposals
>> for the new array builder to handle other dimensions.
>>
>> fwiw,
>> Alan Isaac
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Chris Barker]

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Nathaniel Smith  wrote:

> Going through np.mat also fails on the meta-goal, which is to remove
> reasons for people to prefer np.matrix to np.ndarray, so that eventually we
> can deprecate the former without harm.
>
> As far as this goal goes, it's all very well for some of us to say that
> users should toughen up or whatever, but it's useless: they'll just ignore
> you and use np.mat because it's easier. And then we have even more of a
> mess to clean up later.
>

so maybe don't do anything new, and np.mat can produce an array at some
point in the future when np.matrix is deprecated

-CHB

-- 

Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R(206) 526-6959   voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE   (206) 526-6329   fax
Seattle, WA  98115   (206) 526-6317   main reception

chris.bar...@noaa.gov
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Nathaniel Smith]

On 18 Jul 2014 18:06, "Alan G Isaac"  wrote:
>
> On 7/18/2014 12:45 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
> > If the true goal is to just allow quick entry of a 2d array, why not
just advocate using
> > a = numpy.array(numpy.mat("1 2 3; 4 5 6; 7 8 9"))
>
>
> It's even simpler:
> a = np.mat(' 1 2 3;4 5 6;7 8 9').A
>
> I'm not putting a dog in this race.  Still I would say that
> the reason why such proposals miss the point is that
> there are introductory settings where one would like
> to explain as few complications as possible.  In
> particular, one might prefer *not* to discuss the
> existence of a matrix type.  As an additional downside,
> this is only good for 2d, and there have been proposals
> for the new array builder to handle other dimensions.

Going through np.mat also fails on the meta-goal, which is to remove
reasons for people to prefer np.matrix to np.ndarray, so that eventually we
can deprecate the former without harm.

As far as this goal goes, it's all very well for some of us to say that
users should toughen up or whatever, but it's useless: they'll just ignore
you and use np.mat because it's easier. And then we have even more of a
mess to clean up later.

-n
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Charles G. Waldman]

Well, if the goal is "shorthand", typing numpy.array(numpy.mat())
won't please many users.

But the more I think about it, the less I think Numpy should support
this (non-Pythonic) input mode.  Too much molly-coddling of new users!
When doing interactive work I usually just type:

>>> np.array([[1,2,3],
...   [4,5,6],
...   [7,8,9]])

which is (IMO) easier to read:  e.g. it's not totally obvious that
"1,0,0;0,1,0;0,0,1" represents a 3x3 identity matrix, but

[[1,0,0],
  [0,1,0],
  [0,0,1]]

is pretty obvious.

The difference in (non-whitespace) chars is 19 vs 25, so the
"shorthand" doesn't seem to save that much.

Just my €0.02,

   - C




On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Alan G Isaac  wrote:
> On 7/18/2014 12:45 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>> If the true goal is to just allow quick entry of a 2d array, why not just 
>> advocate using
>> a = numpy.array(numpy.mat("1 2 3; 4 5 6; 7 8 9"))
>
>
> It's even simpler:
> a = np.mat(' 1 2 3;4 5 6;7 8 9').A
>
> I'm not putting a dog in this race.  Still I would say that
> the reason why such proposals miss the point is that
> there are introductory settings where one would like
> to explain as few complications as possible.  In
> particular, one might prefer *not* to discuss the
> existence of a matrix type.  As an additional downside,
> this is only good for 2d, and there have been proposals
> for the new array builder to handle other dimensions.
>
> fwiw,
> Alan Isaac
>
> ___
> 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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Alan G Isaac]

On 7/18/2014 12:45 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
> If the true goal is to just allow quick entry of a 2d array, why not just 
> advocate using
> a = numpy.array(numpy.mat("1 2 3; 4 5 6; 7 8 9"))


It's even simpler:
a = np.mat(' 1 2 3;4 5 6;7 8 9').A

I'm not putting a dog in this race.  Still I would say that
the reason why such proposals miss the point is that
there are introductory settings where one would like
to explain as few complications as possible.  In
particular, one might prefer *not* to discuss the
existence of a matrix type.  As an additional downside,
this is only good for 2d, and there have been proposals
for the new array builder to handle other dimensions.

fwiw,
Alan Isaac

___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Charles G. Waldman  wrote:
> I greatly prefer "np.mat" to "np.arr" for this, FWIW

Unfortunately that's already taken...

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith
Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh
http://vorpus.org
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Mark Miller]

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:37 AM, Nathaniel Smith  wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Charles G. Waldman 
> wrote:
> >
> > -1 on the 'arr' name.  I think if we're going to support this function
> at all (which I'm not convinced is a good idea), it should be
> np.fromsomething like the other from* functions.
> >
> > Maybe frommatlab?
> >
> > I think that 'arr' is just too generic and too close to 'array'.
>
> Well, it's definitely not a good idea if we name it something like that
> :-).
>
> The whole motivation is to provide a quick way to type 2d arrays
> interactively, hence the current name "np.mat". (The fact that it
> happens to match matlab syntax is a nice bonus, because stealing is
> always better than inventing when it works.)
>
>
Some minor confusion on my part. If the true goal is to just allow quick
entry of a 2d array, why not just advocate using

a = numpy.array(numpy.mat("1 2 3; 4 5 6; 7 8 9"))

If anyone is really set on having this functionality, they could just write
a one-line wrapper function and call it a day.

Note that I would personally not use this type of shorthand syntax for
teaching or presentations. I'd prefer to use proper python syntax myself
from the get go rather than having to start over from square one and teach
a completely different syntax for constructing >2d arrays.

"There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it."
-Zen of Python
-Mark

___
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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Charles G. Waldman]

I greatly prefer "np.mat" to "np.arr" for this, FWIW


On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:37 AM, Nathaniel Smith  wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Charles G. Waldman  
> wrote:
>>
>> -1 on the 'arr' name.  I think if we're going to support this function at 
>> all (which I'm not convinced is a good idea), it should be np.fromsomething 
>> like the other from* functions.
>>
>> Maybe frommatlab?
>>
>> I think that 'arr' is just too generic and too close to 'array'.
>
> Well, it's definitely not a good idea if we name it something like that :-).
>
> The whole motivation is to provide a quick way to type 2d arrays
> interactively, hence the current name "np.mat". (The fact that it
> happens to match matlab syntax is a nice bonus, because stealing is
> always better than inventing when it works.)
>
> --
> Nathaniel J. Smith
> Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh
> http://vorpus.org
> ___
> 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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Charles G. Waldman  wrote:
>
> -1 on the 'arr' name.  I think if we're going to support this function at all 
> (which I'm not convinced is a good idea), it should be np.fromsomething like 
> the other from* functions.
>
> Maybe frommatlab?
>
> I think that 'arr' is just too generic and too close to 'array'.

Well, it's definitely not a good idea if we name it something like that :-).

The whole motivation is to provide a quick way to type 2d arrays
interactively, hence the current name "np.mat". (The fact that it
happens to match matlab syntax is a nice bonus, because stealing is
always better than inventing when it works.)

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith
Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh
http://vorpus.org
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Charles G. Waldman]

-1 on the 'arr' name.  I think if we're going to support this function at
all (which I'm not convinced is a good idea), it should be np.fromsomething
like the other from* functions.

Maybe frommatlab?

I think that 'arr' is just too generic and too close to 'array'.





On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 3:55 AM, Nathaniel Smith  wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Alexander Belopolsky 
> wrote:
>
>> Also, the use of strings will confuse most syntax highlighters.  Compare
>> the two options in this screenshot:
>>
>> [image: Inline image 2]
>>
>
> I guess this is a minor issue for "real" code, but even IPython doesn't
> (yet?) provide syntax highlighting for lines as they're typed, and this is
> a tool intended mainly for interactive use.
>
> That screenshot also I think illustrates why people have such a preference
> for the first syntax. The second line looks nice, but try typing it quickly
> and getting all the commas located correctly inside versus outside of each
> of the triply-nested brackets...
>
> No-one's come up with any names for this that are nearly as good as "arr".
> Is it really that bad to have to type one extra character, np.array instead
> of np.arr?
>
> -n
>
> --
> Nathaniel J. Smith
> Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh
> http://vorpus.org
>
> ___
> 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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Alexander Belopolsky 
wrote:

> Also, the use of strings will confuse most syntax highlighters.  Compare
> the two options in this screenshot:
>
> [image: Inline image 2]
>

I guess this is a minor issue for "real" code, but even IPython doesn't
(yet?) provide syntax highlighting for lines as they're typed, and this is
a tool intended mainly for interactive use.

That screenshot also I think illustrates why people have such a preference
for the first syntax. The second line looks nice, but try typing it quickly
and getting all the commas located correctly inside versus outside of each
of the triply-nested brackets...

No-one's come up with any names for this that are nearly as good as "arr".
Is it really that bad to have to type one extra character, np.array instead
of np.arr?

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith
Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh
http://vorpus.org
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Alexander Belopolsky]

Also, the use of strings will confuse most syntax highlighters.  Compare
the two options in this screenshot:

[image: Inline image 2]
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Jacco Hoekstra - LR]

WeIl, I do not see the confusion here (only due to the use of the array 
function, maybe). It is a string, after all, so it should be colour-coded as 
such.

I would love to keep this feaure of np.mat in somehow, named np.txt2arr or 
something. We, linear algebraists, will already lose the .I method for matrix 
inversion, the * for matrix multiplication, let’s keep at least one of the many 
handy features of the matrix-type in.  It is simply a very useful, short-hand 
way, probably a separate function, to make a 2D-array. If you think it’s ugly, 
don’t use it. But it certainly is faster to type it and former Matlab-users 
will love it as well. Just my 2 cts.

From: numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org 
[mailto:numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Belopolsky
Sent: zondag 13 juli 2014 19:31
To: Discussion of Numerical Python
Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

Also, the use of strings will confuse most syntax highlighters.  Compare the 
two options in this screenshot:

[Inline image 2]
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Alexander Belopolsky]

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Daniel da Silva 
wrote:

> If leading a presentation on scientific computing in Python to beginners,
> which would look better on a bullet in a slide?
>
>-
>
>np.build('.2 .7 .1; .3 .5 .2; .1 .1 .9'))
>
>-
>
>np.array([[.2, .7, .1], [.3, .5, .2], [.1, .1, .9]])
>
>
> np.array([[.2, .7, .1],
  [.3, .5, .2],
  [.1, .1, .9]])
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Daπid]

On 11 July 2014 22:30, Daniel da Silva  wrote:

> I think the idea at hand is not that it would be used everyday, but it
> would be there when needed. What people do everyday is with *real* data.
> They are using functions to load the data.
>

But sometimes we have to hard-code a few values, and it is true that making
a list (or nested list) is quite verbose; one example are unittests. Having
a MATLAB-style array creation would be convenient for those cases.
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Daniel da Silva]

I think the idea at hand is not that it would be used everyday, but it
would be there when needed. What people do everyday is with *real* data.
They are using functions to load the data. Where this would come in useful
would be presentations and tutorials.

If leading a presentation on scientific computing in Python to beginners,
which would look better on a bullet in a slide?

   -

   np.build('.2 .7 .1; .3 .5 .2; .1 .1 .9'))

   -

   np.array([[.2, .7, .1], [.3, .5, .2], [.1, .1, .9]])


The default way of defining contrived arrays by passing lists of lists is
awkward for beginners. While lists of lists are not a hard concept, it's
not something you want to force on someone who doesn't know the Python
language yet. The second bullet above doesn't represent the readability of
the Python world.

I would suggest that this be named np.build() (or np.helpers.build()) in
light of it providing a simple interface to building arrays. Again, when
you work with real data you are taking an extra step to think about how you
load that data. That's not what you need to think about when being
introduced to NumPy.






On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Pauli Virtanen  wrote:

> 07.07.2014 21:32, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal kirjoitti:
> > If you are going to introduce this functionality, please don't call it
> > np.arr.
>
> It might be appropriate for pirate versions of Numpy.
>
> ***
>
> Seriously though, having a variant of `mat` that returns arrays could be
> useful, so weak +0. Preferably, the name should be quite short to type.
>
> On the other hand, unlike r_ and c_, I haven't seen or used mat() in
> real code.
>
> --
> Pauli Virtanen
>
> ___
> 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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Pauli Virtanen]

07.07.2014 21:32, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal kirjoitti:
> If you are going to introduce this functionality, please don't call it
> np.arr.

It might be appropriate for pirate versions of Numpy.

***

Seriously though, having a variant of `mat` that returns arrays could be
useful, so weak +0. Preferably, the name should be quite short to type.

On the other hand, unlike r_ and c_, I haven't seen or used mat() in
real code.

-- 
Pauli Virtanen

___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Chris Barker - NOAA Federal]

On Jul 7, 2014, at 7:28 AM, Sebastian Berg  wrote:
> not sure that many use np.r_ or np.c_

I actually really like those ;-)

-Chris
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Chris Barker - NOAA Federal]

If you are going to introduce this functionality, please don't call it
np.arr.


I agree, but..,

I would suggest calling it something like np.array_simple or
np.array_from_string, but the best choice IMO, would be
np.ndarray.from_string (a static constructor method).


Except the entire point of his is that it's easy to type...

-1 on the whole idea -- this isn't Matlab, I'd saving a little typing worth
it?

CHB


___
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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[josef . pktd]

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Nathaniel Smith  wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Sebastian Berg
>  wrote:
> > On Mo, 2014-07-07 at 09:50 -0400, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Sebastian Berg
> >>  wrote:
> >> On Mo, 2014-07-07 at 08:25 -0400, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> >> > On 7/7/2014 7:17 AM, Daπid wrote:
> >> > > How about a new one? np.matarray, for MATLAB array.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > How about `str2arr` or even `build`, since teaching appears
> >> to be a focus.
> >> > Also, I agree '1 2 3' shd become 1d and '1 2 3;' shd become
> >> 2d.
> >> > It seems unambiguous to allow '1 2 3;;' to be 3d, or even
> >> > '1 2;3 4;;5 6;7 8' (two 2d arrays), but I'm just noting
> >> > that, not urging that it be implemented.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Probably overdoing it, but if we plan on more then just this,
> >> what about
> >> banning such functions to something like
> >> numpy.interactive/numpy.helpers
> >> which you can then import * (or better specific functions)
> >> from?
> >>
> >> I think the fact that you need many imports on startup should
> >> rather be
> >> fixed by an ipython scientific mode or other startup imports.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Is this whole thing really worth it? We get back to a numpy pylab.
> >>
> >>
> >> First users learn the dirty shortcuts, and then they have to learn how
> >> to do it "properly".
> >>
> >
> > Yeah, you are right. Just a bit afraid of creating too many such
> > functions that I am not sure are very useful/used much. For example I am
> > not sure that many use np.r_ or np.c_
>
> Yeah, we definitely have too many random bits of API around overall.
> But I think this one is probably worthwhile. It doesn't add any real
> complexity (no new types, trivial for readers to understand the first
> time they encounter it, etc.), and it addresses a recurring perceived
> shortcoming of numpy that people run into in the first 5 minutes of
> use, at a time when it's pretty easy to give up and go back to Matlab.
> And, it removes one of the perceived advantages of np.matrix over
> np.ndarray, so it smooths our way for eventually phasing out
> np.matrix.
>
> I'm not sure that preserving np.arr is that important ( here
> only saves 1 character!), but some possible alternatives for short
> names:
>
>   np.marr  ("matlab-like array construction")
>   np.sarr   ("string array")
>   np.parse
>

short like np.s   (didn't know there is already s_)

something long like

>>> np.fromstring('1 2', sep=' ')
array([ 1.,  2.])


>>> np.fromstring2d('1 2 3; 5 3.4 7')
array([[ 1. ,  2. ,  3. ],
   [ 5. ,  3.4,  7. ]])


Josef





>
> -n
>
> --
> Nathaniel J. Smith
> Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh
> http://vorpus.org
> ___
> 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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Sebastian Berg
 wrote:
> On Mo, 2014-07-07 at 09:50 -0400, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Sebastian Berg
>>  wrote:
>> On Mo, 2014-07-07 at 08:25 -0400, Alan G Isaac wrote:
>> > On 7/7/2014 7:17 AM, Daπid wrote:
>> > > How about a new one? np.matarray, for MATLAB array.
>> >
>> >
>> > How about `str2arr` or even `build`, since teaching appears
>> to be a focus.
>> > Also, I agree '1 2 3' shd become 1d and '1 2 3;' shd become
>> 2d.
>> > It seems unambiguous to allow '1 2 3;;' to be 3d, or even
>> > '1 2;3 4;;5 6;7 8' (two 2d arrays), but I'm just noting
>> > that, not urging that it be implemented.
>> >
>>
>> Probably overdoing it, but if we plan on more then just this,
>> what about
>> banning such functions to something like
>> numpy.interactive/numpy.helpers
>> which you can then import * (or better specific functions)
>> from?
>>
>> I think the fact that you need many imports on startup should
>> rather be
>> fixed by an ipython scientific mode or other startup imports.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Is this whole thing really worth it? We get back to a numpy pylab.
>>
>>
>> First users learn the dirty shortcuts, and then they have to learn how
>> to do it "properly".
>>
>
> Yeah, you are right. Just a bit afraid of creating too many such
> functions that I am not sure are very useful/used much. For example I am
> not sure that many use np.r_ or np.c_

Yeah, we definitely have too many random bits of API around overall.
But I think this one is probably worthwhile. It doesn't add any real
complexity (no new types, trivial for readers to understand the first
time they encounter it, etc.), and it addresses a recurring perceived
shortcoming of numpy that people run into in the first 5 minutes of
use, at a time when it's pretty easy to give up and go back to Matlab.
And, it removes one of the perceived advantages of np.matrix over
np.ndarray, so it smooths our way for eventually phasing out
np.matrix.

I'm not sure that preserving np.arr is that important ( here
only saves 1 character!), but some possible alternatives for short
names:

  np.marr  ("matlab-like array construction")
  np.sarr   ("string array")
  np.parse

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith
Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh
http://vorpus.org
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Sebastian Berg]

On Mo, 2014-07-07 at 09:50 -0400, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Sebastian Berg
>  wrote:
> On Mo, 2014-07-07 at 08:25 -0400, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> > On 7/7/2014 7:17 AM, Daπid wrote:
> > > How about a new one? np.matarray, for MATLAB array.
> >
> >
> > How about `str2arr` or even `build`, since teaching appears
> to be a focus.
> > Also, I agree '1 2 3' shd become 1d and '1 2 3;' shd become
> 2d.
> > It seems unambiguous to allow '1 2 3;;' to be 3d, or even
> > '1 2;3 4;;5 6;7 8' (two 2d arrays), but I'm just noting
> > that, not urging that it be implemented.
> >
> 
> 
> Probably overdoing it, but if we plan on more then just this,
> what about
> banning such functions to something like
> numpy.interactive/numpy.helpers
> which you can then import * (or better specific functions)
> from?
> 
> I think the fact that you need many imports on startup should
> rather be
> fixed by an ipython scientific mode or other startup imports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this whole thing really worth it? We get back to a numpy pylab.
> 
> 
> First users learn the dirty shortcuts, and then they have to learn how
> to do it "properly".
> 

Yeah, you are right. Just a bit afraid of creating too many such
functions that I am not sure are very useful/used much. For example I am
not sure that many use np.r_ or np.c_

> 
> 
> (I'm using quite often string split and reshape for copy-pasted text
> tables.)
> 
> 
> Josef
> 
> 
>  
> 
> - Sebastian
> 
> > Alan Isaac
> >
> > ___
> > 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



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[josef . pktd]

On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Sebastian Berg 
wrote:

> On Mo, 2014-07-07 at 08:25 -0400, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> > On 7/7/2014 7:17 AM, Daπid wrote:
> > > How about a new one? np.matarray, for MATLAB array.
> >
> >
> > How about `str2arr` or even `build`, since teaching appears to be a
> focus.
> > Also, I agree '1 2 3' shd become 1d and '1 2 3;' shd become 2d.
> > It seems unambiguous to allow '1 2 3;;' to be 3d, or even
> > '1 2;3 4;;5 6;7 8' (two 2d arrays), but I'm just noting
> > that, not urging that it be implemented.
> >
>
> Probably overdoing it, but if we plan on more then just this, what about
> banning such functions to something like numpy.interactive/numpy.helpers
> which you can then import * (or better specific functions) from?
>
> I think the fact that you need many imports on startup should rather be
> fixed by an ipython scientific mode or other startup imports.
>


Is this whole thing really worth it? We get back to a numpy pylab.

First users learn the dirty shortcuts, and then they have to learn how to
do it "properly".

(I'm using quite often string split and reshape for copy-pasted text
tables.)

Josef



>
> - Sebastian
>
> > Alan Isaac
> >
> > ___
> > 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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Sebastian Berg]

On Mo, 2014-07-07 at 08:25 -0400, Alan G Isaac wrote:
> On 7/7/2014 7:17 AM, Daπid wrote:
> > How about a new one? np.matarray, for MATLAB array.
> 
> 
> How about `str2arr` or even `build`, since teaching appears to be a focus.
> Also, I agree '1 2 3' shd become 1d and '1 2 3;' shd become 2d.
> It seems unambiguous to allow '1 2 3;;' to be 3d, or even
> '1 2;3 4;;5 6;7 8' (two 2d arrays), but I'm just noting
> that, not urging that it be implemented.
> 

Probably overdoing it, but if we plan on more then just this, what about
banning such functions to something like numpy.interactive/numpy.helpers
which you can then import * (or better specific functions) from?

I think the fact that you need many imports on startup should rather be
fixed by an ipython scientific mode or other startup imports.

- Sebastian

> Alan Isaac
> 
> ___
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Alan G Isaac]

On 7/7/2014 7:17 AM, Daπid wrote:
> How about a new one? np.matarray, for MATLAB array.


How about `str2arr` or even `build`, since teaching appears to be a focus.
Also, I agree '1 2 3' shd become 1d and '1 2 3;' shd become 2d.
It seems unambiguous to allow '1 2 3;;' to be 3d, or even
'1 2;3 4;;5 6;7 8' (two 2d arrays), but I'm just noting
that, not urging that it be implemented.

Alan Isaac

___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Daπid]

On 7 July 2014 08:48, Jacco Hoekstra - LR  wrote:

> How about using the old name np.mat() for this type of array creation?


How about a new one? np.matarray, for MATLAB array.

/David.
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Jacco Hoekstra - LR]

How about using the old name np.mat() for this type of array creation?

So the:

A = np.mat(“1 2;3 4”)

creates a two dimensional array.

But then resulting in an array A instead of the matrix type? It might at least 
provide some partial downward compatibility.

Best regards,
Jacco Hoekstra


From: numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org 
[mailto:numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Belopolsky
Sent: maandag 7 juli 2014 6:30
To: Discussion of Numerical Python
Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style


On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 10:59 PM, Eric Firing 
mailto:efir...@hawaii.edu>> wrote:
> I would suggest calling it something like np.array_simple or
> np.array_from_string, but the best choice IMO, would be
> np.ndarray.from_string (a static constructor method).

I think the problem is that this defeats the point: minimizing typing
when doing an off-the-cuff demo or test.

You can always put np.arr = np.ndarray.from_string or even arr = 
np.ndarray.from_string right next to the line where you define np.  (Which 
makes me wonder if something like this belongs to ipython magic.)
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Alexander Belopolsky]

On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 10:59 PM, Eric Firing  wrote:

> > I would suggest calling it something like np.array_simple or
> > np.array_from_string, but the best choice IMO, would be
> > np.ndarray.from_string (a static constructor method).
>
>
> I think the problem is that this defeats the point: minimizing typing
> when doing an off-the-cuff demo or test.


You can always put np.arr = np.ndarray.from_string or even arr =
np.ndarray.from_string right next to the line where you define np.  (Which
makes me wonder if something like this belongs to ipython magic.)
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Eric Firing]

On 2014/07/06, 4:27 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Eric Firing  > wrote:
>
>   (I'm not entirely convinced
> np.arr() is a good idea at all; but if it is, it must be kept simple.)
>
>
> If you are going to introduce this functionality, please don't call it
> np.arr.
>
> Right now, np.a presents you with a whopping 53 completion choices.
>   Adding "r", narrows that to 21, but np.arr completes to np.array
> right away.  Please don't introduce another bump in this road.
>
> "Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!"
>
> I would suggest calling it something like np.array_simple or
> np.array_from_string, but the best choice IMO, would be
> np.ndarray.from_string (a static constructor method).


I think the problem is that this defeats the point: minimizing typing 
when doing an off-the-cuff demo or test.  I don't know that this use 
case justifies the clutter, regardless of what it is called; but 
evidently there is some demand for it.

Eric

>
>
> ___
> 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] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Alexander Belopolsky]

On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Eric Firing  wrote:

>  (I'm not entirely convinced
> np.arr() is a good idea at all; but if it is, it must be kept simple.)
>

If you are going to introduce this functionality, please don't call it
np.arr.

Right now, np.a presents you with a whopping 53 completion choices.
 Adding "r", narrows that to 21, but np.arr completes to np.array
right away.  Please don't introduce another bump in this road.

"Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!"

I would suggest calling it something like np.array_simple or
np.array_from_string, but the best choice IMO, would be
np.ndarray.from_string (a static constructor method).
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Eric Firing]

On 2014/07/06, 11:43 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 9:35 PM, Daniel da Silva
>  wrote:
>> The idea is that there be a short-hand for creating arrays as there is for
>> matrices:
>>
>>np.mat('.2 .7 .1; .3 .5 .2; .1 .1 .9')
>>
>> It was suggested in GitHub issue #4817 in light that it would be beneficial
>> to beginners and to presenters during demonstrations.  In GitHub pull
>> request #484, I implemented this as the np.arr function.
>>
>> Does anyone have any feedback on the API details? Some examples from my
>> implementation follow.
>>
> np.arr('3; 4; 5')
>>  array([[3],
>> [4],
>> [5]])
>>
> np.arr('3; 4; 5', dtype=float)
>>  array([[ 3.],
>> [ 4.],
>> [ 5.]])
>>
> np.arr('1 0 0; 0 1 0; 0 0 1')
>>  array([[1, 0, 0],
>> [0, 1, 0],
>> [0, 0, 1]])
>>
> np.arr('4, 5; 6, 7')
>>  array([[4, 5],
>> [6, 7]])
>
> It occurs to me that np.mat always returns a 2d matrix, but for arrays
> there are more options.
>
> What should np.arr('1 2 3') return? a 1d array or a 2d row vector?

I would say 1d array.  This is numpy, not numpy.matrix.

> (Maybe np.arr('1 2 3;') should give the row-vector?)

Yes, it is reasonable that a semicolon should trigger 2d.

>
> Should there be some way to write 3d or higher-d arrays?

No, there should not.  This is for quick demos and that sort of thing. 
It is not a substitute for np.array().  (I'm not entirely convinced 
np.arr() is a good idea at all; but if it is, it must be kept simple.)

A possible downside for beginners is that this might delay their 
understanding that the commas are needed for np.array([1, 2, 3]).

Eric

>
> -n
>

___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 9:35 PM, Daniel da Silva
 wrote:
> The idea is that there be a short-hand for creating arrays as there is for
> matrices:
>
>   np.mat('.2 .7 .1; .3 .5 .2; .1 .1 .9')
>
> It was suggested in GitHub issue #4817 in light that it would be beneficial
> to beginners and to presenters during demonstrations.  In GitHub pull
> request #484, I implemented this as the np.arr function.
>
> Does anyone have any feedback on the API details? Some examples from my
> implementation follow.
>
 np.arr('3; 4; 5')
> array([[3],
>[4],
>[5]])
>
 np.arr('3; 4; 5', dtype=float)
> array([[ 3.],
>[ 4.],
>[ 5.]])
>
 np.arr('1 0 0; 0 1 0; 0 0 1')
> array([[1, 0, 0],
>[0, 1, 0],
>[0, 0, 1]])
>
 np.arr('4, 5; 6, 7')
> array([[4, 5],
>[6, 7]])

It occurs to me that np.mat always returns a 2d matrix, but for arrays
there are more options.

What should np.arr('1 2 3') return? a 1d array or a 2d row vector?
(Maybe np.arr('1 2 3;') should give the row-vector?)

Should there be some way to write 3d or higher-d arrays?

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith
Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh
http://vorpus.org
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

[Numpy-discussion] Short-hand array creation in `numpy.mat` style

[Daniel da Silva]

The idea is that there be a short-hand for creating arrays as there is for
matrices:

  np.mat('.2 .7 .1; .3 .5 .2; .1 .1 .9')

It was suggested in GitHub issue #4817
 in light that it would be
beneficial to beginners and to presenters during demonstrations.  In GitHub
pull request #484 , I implemented
this as the np.arr function.

Does anyone have any feedback on the API details? Some examples from my
implementation follow.

>>> np.arr('3; 4; 5')
array([[3],
   [4],
   [5]])

>>> np.arr('3; 4; 5', dtype=float)
array([[ 3.],
   [ 4.],
   [ 5.]])

>>> np.arr('1 0 0; 0 1 0; 0 0 1')
array([[1, 0, 0],
   [0, 1, 0],
   [0, 0, 1]])

>>> np.arr('4, 5; 6, 7')
array([[4, 5],
   [6, 7]])
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion