[Numpy-discussion] Args for rand and randn: call for a vote

Ed Schofield schofield at ftw.at
Sat Jul 8 06:07:11 CDT 2006


Last week's discussion on rand() and randn() seemed to indicate a  
sentiment that they ought to take tuples for consistency with ones,  
zeros, eye, identity, and empty -- that, although they are supposed  
to be convenience functions, they are inconvenient precisely because  
of their inconsistency with these other functions.  This issue has  
been raised many times over the past several months.

Travis made a change in r2572 to allow tuples as arguments, then took  
it out again a few hours later, apparently unsure about whether this  
was a good idea.

I'd like to call for a vote on what people would prefer, and then ask  
Travis to make a final pronouncement before the feature freeze.




* Should numpy.rand and numpy.randn accept sequences of dimensions as  
arguments, like rand((3,3)), as an alternative to rand(3,3)?


OR


* Should rand((3,3)) and randn((3,3)) continue to raise a TypeError?






More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list