[Numpy-discussion] Raveling, reshape order keyword unnecessarily confuses index and memory ordering
Wed Apr 3 16:58:37 CDT 2013
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal <
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Matthew Brett <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > It was not enough for me or the three others who will publicly admit
> > to the shame of finding it confusing without further thought.
> I would submit that some of the confusion came from the fact that with
> ravel(), and the 'A' and 'K' flags, you are forced to figure out BOTH
> index_order and memory_order -- with one flag -- I know I'm still not
> clear what I'd get in complex situations.
> > Again, I just can't see a reason not to separate these ideas.
> I agree, but really separating them -- but ideally having a given
> function only deal with one or the other, not both at once.
> > We are
> > not arguing about backwards compatibility here, only about clarity.
> while it could be changed while strictly maintaining backward
> compatibility -- it is a change that would need to filter through the
> docs, example, random blog posts, stack=overflow questions, etc......
Not only that, we would then also be in the situation of having `order`
*and* `xxx_order` keywords. This is also confusing, at least as much as the
current situation imho.
> Is that worth it? I'm not convinced
> > Right. I think you may now be close to my own discomfort when faced
> > with working out (fast) what:
> > np.reshape(a, (3,4), order='F')
> I still think it's cause you know too much.... ;-)
> Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
> 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
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion