[Numpy-discussion] question about ufuncs
Fri Feb 6 17:11:10 CST 2009
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Pierre GM <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Feb 6, 2009, at 4:25 PM, Darren Dale wrote:
> > I've been looking at how ma implements things like multiply() and
> > MaskedArray.__mul__. I'm surprised that MaskedArray.__mul__ actually
> > calls ma.multiply() rather than calling
> > super(MaskedArray,self).__mul__().
> There's some under-the-hood machinery to deal with the data, and we
> need to be able to manipulate it *before* the operation takes place.
> The super() approach calls __array_wrap__ on the result, so *after*
> the operation took place, and that's not what we wanted...
It looks like there are enough cases where manipulation needs to happen on
the way in that it might be useful to consider a mechanism for doing so. It
could avoid the need for lots of wrappers and decorators down the road.
> > Maybe that is the way ndarray does it, but I don't think this is the
> > right approach for my quantity subclasses. If I want to make a
> > MaskedQuantity (someday), MaskedQuantity.__mul__ should be calling
> > super(MaskedQuantity,self).__mul__(), not reimplementations of
> > numpy.multiply or ma.multiply, right?
> You'll end up calling ma.multiply anyway
> (super(MaskedQuantity,self).__mul__ will call MaskedArray.__mul__
> which calls ma.multiply... So yes, I think you can stick to the
> super() approach in your case
> > There are some cases where the default numpy function expects
> > certain units on the way in, like the trig functions, which I think
> > would have to be reimplemented.
> And you can probably define a generic class to deal with that instead
> of reimplementing the functions individually (and we're back to the
> initial advice).
> > But aside from that, is there anything wrong with taking this
> > approach? It seems to allow quantities to integrate pretty well with
> > the numpy builtins.
> Go and try, the problems (if any) will show up...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Numpy-discussion