[Numpy-discussion] Proposal for new ufunc functionality
Tue Apr 13 15:34:38 CDT 2010
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 17:59, Robert Kern <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 12:45, Pauli Virtanen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> la, 2010-04-10 kello 12:23 -0500, Travis Oliphant kirjoitti:
>>> Here are my suggested additions to NumPy:
>>> ufunc methods:
>>> * reducein (array, indices, axis=0)
>>> similar to reduce-at, but the indices provide both the
>>> start and end points (rather than being fence-posts like reduceat).
>> Is the `reducein` important to have, as compared to `reduceat`?
> Yes, I think so. If there are some areas you want to ignore, that's
> difficult to do with reduceat().
And conversely overlapping areas are highly useful but completely
impossible to do with reduceat.
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless
enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as
though it had an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
More information about the NumPy-Discussion