[Numpy-discussion] Should 0-d arrays with fields defined return a 0-d array or a scalar
Fri Mar 30 09:41:22 CDT 2007
Does this mean, we could do something like this?
a = 3
a = array(a)
a[ a<4 ] = 5
If so, that would be great!
On Mar 29, 9:20 pm, Travis Oliphant <oliphant.tra...@ieee.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
> Ticket #474 discusses the problem that getting a field from a 0-d array
> automatically produces a scalar (which then cannot be set).
> This produces the problem that recarrays code must often special-case
> the 0-d possibility.
> rarr.x[...] = blah
> doesn't work for 0-d arrays because rarr.x is a scalar.
> It makes some sense to make field selection for 0-d arrays return 0-d
> arrays as consistent with the changes that were made prior to the 1.0
> release to allow persistence of 0-d arrays.
> However, changing field selection to return 0-d arrays does change
> behavior. A 0-d array is not a scalar (the 0-d array is not hashable
> for example, and the 0-d string array does not inherit from the Python
> string). Thus, just making the change, may not be advised.
> It is easy to account for and fix any errors that might arise. But, we
> are in a major release, I need some advice as to whether or not this is
> a "bug-fix" or a feature enhancement that must wait for 1.1?
> Any stake holders in the current behavior of arrays with records?
> Numpy-discussion mailing list
More information about the Numpy-discussion