On 3/26/07, Alan G Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, "Colin J. Williams" apparently wrote: > One would expect the iteration over A to return row > vectors, represented by (1, n) matrices. This is again simple assertion. **Why** would "one" expect this? Some people clearly do not.
Well, and what *should* they expect. I think it is expected because the for iterates over rows and rows of matrices are 1xn. Matrices and arrays, as has been stated, are different animals. Probably it would have been best to stick with arrays and I suspect that matrices appeared because of the dearth of Python operators, in particular to make matrix multiplication simpler. On the other hand, certain errors slip by when one is implementing matrix algebra with arrays, but they can be avoided by never using 1-d vectors. So all this mess results from catering to the matrix community. Matlab has the opposite problem, multidimensional arrays were tacked on later and they don't operate properly with everything. Chuck One person commented that this unexpected behavior was
a source of error in their code. Another person commented that they did not even guess that such a thing would be possible. Experience with Python should lead to the ability to anticipate the outcome. Apparently this is not the case. That suggests a design problem. What about **Python** would lead us to expect this behavior?? In *contrast*, everyone agrees that for a matrix M, we should get a matrix from M[0,:]. This is expected and desirable. Cheers, Alan Isaac _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
_______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
