[Numpy-discussion] ufunc and nditer flags (was Re: Code Freeze for NumPy 1.7)

jay bourque jay.bourque@continuum...
Sun Jul 15 15:03:04 CDT 2012


Travis can better speak to specific use cases, but one example where this
might be useful is an "in place" ufunc, or a ufunc operand that's
broadcasted and can hold a reduce value.

On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 6:18 PM, jay bourque <jay.bourque@continuum.io>
> wrote:
> > Just added PR #359. The purpose is to allow the nditer object operand and
> > iter flags to be set for a ufunc to provide better control over how an
> array
> > is iterated over by a ufunc and how the ufunc uses the operands passed to
> > it. One specific motivation for this is to be able to specify an input
> > operand to a ufunc as being read/write instead of read only.
>
> Huh. My first gut reaction to this is that it's an argument *against*
> merging this change, because ufuncs *shouldn't* be writing to their
> inputs. Maybe I'm wrong, but... obviously there is more context here
> than we've heard so far. Can you explain what you're actually trying
> to accomplish?
>
> -n
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20120715/e4d80d46/attachment.html 


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list