[Numpy-discussion] New numpy functions: filled, filled_like
Fri Jan 18 10:57:36 CST 2013
On 18/01/2013 17:46, Benjamin Root wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Daniele Nicolodi <firstname.lastname@example.org
> <mailto:email@example.com>> wrote:
> On 18/01/2013 15:19, Benjamin Root wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:44 AM, Daniele Nicolodi
> <firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com>
> > <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com>>> wrote:
> > On 17/01/2013 23:27, Mark Wiebe wrote:
> > > Would it be too weird or clumsy to extend the empty and
> > > functions to do the filling?
> > >
> > > np.empty((10, 10), fill=np.nan)
> > > np.empty_like(my_arr, fill=np.nan)
> > Wouldn't it be more natural to extend the ndarray constructor?
> > np.ndarray((10, 10), fill=np.nan)
> > It looks more natural to me. In this way it is not possible to
> have the
> > _like extension, but I don't see it as a major drawback.
> > Cheers,
> > Daniele
> > This isn't a bad idea. Although, I would wager that most people, like
> > myself, use np.array() and np.array_like() instead of
> np.ndarray(). We
> > should also double-check and see how well that would fit in with the
> > other contructors like masked arrays and matrix objects.
> Hello Ben,
> I don't really get what you mean with this. np.array() construct a numpy
> array from an array-like object, np.ndarray() accepts a dimensions tuple
> as first parameter, I don't see any np.array_like in the current numpy
> My bad, I had a brain-fart and got mixed up. I was thinking of
> np.empty(). In fact, I never use np.ndarray(), I use np.empty().
> Besides np.ndarray() being the actual constructor, what is the
> difference between them?
I was also wondering what's the difference between np.ndarray() and
np.empty(). I thought the second was a wrapper around the first, but it
looks like both of them are actually implemented in C...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion