The NumPy Fortran-ordering quiz

Charles R Harris charlesr.harris at
Wed Oct 18 17:19:36 CDT 2006

On 10/18/06, Travis Oliphant <oliphant at> wrote:
> Charles R Harris wrote:
> >
> > Could we make a few changes ;)
> >
> > For printing the flags I would suggest using C-Contiguous and
> > F-Contiguous so folks don't have to read the book. And at the c level
> > define alternates, i.e, #define c-contiguous contiguous or whatever.
> > That way backward compatibility would be maintained but more
> > descriptive names would be available.
> Printing the flags is not intended for the casual user.  So, I'd like to
> keep consistent with C-level names and the names that are printed.
> CONTIGUOUS is the old name Numeric used.  It always meant C-CONTIGUOUS
> and so that meaning is preserved.  FORTRAN is the new one flag and it
> So, you want something like?
> and to have C_CONTIGUOUS and F_CONTIGUOUS print for the flags description?

Yes, I think that would be more informative.

I'm not opposed to it, but I don't really see the need.  It's just a
> semantic question.  Given the history of CONTIGUOUS in Numeric I thought
> it was clear that CONTIGUOUS always meant C-contiguous.

Well, I knew that for numeric, but it was a good deal less obvious in combo
with the order keyword.  For instance, contiguous could change its meaning
to match up with FORTRAN, so that FORTRAN=True and CONTIGUOUS=True meant
Fortran contiguous, which was sort of what I was thinking. Explicit never

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
-------------- next part --------------
Numpy-discussion mailing list
Numpy-discussion at

More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list