On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:10 PM, Alan G Isaac <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 1:49 AM, Mark Miller<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Not quite. Bincount is fine if you have a set of approximately >>> sequential numbers. But if you don't.... > > > On 6/1/2011 9:35 PM, David Cournapeau wrote: >> Even worse, it fails miserably if you sequential numbers but with a high >> shift. >> np.bincount([100000001, 100000002]) # will take a lof of memory >> Doing bincount with dict is faster in those cases. > > > Since this discussion has turned shortcomings of bincount, > may I ask why np.bincount([]) is not an empty array? > Even more puzzling, why is np.bincount([],minlength=6) > not a 6-array of zeros? >
Just looks like it wasn't coded that way, but it's low-hanging fruit. Any objections to adding this behavior? This commit should take care of it. Tests pass. Comments welcome, as I'm just getting my feet wet here. https://github.com/jseabold/numpy/commit/133148880bba5fa3a11dfbb95cefb3da4f7970d5 Skipper _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
