Hi, Le 14/01/2013 20:05, Benjamin Root a écrit : > I do like the way you are thinking in terms of the broadcasting > semantics, but I wonder if that is a bit awkward. What I mean is, if > one were to use broadcasting semantics for creating an array, wouldn't > one have just simply used broadcasting anyway? The point of > broadcasting is to _avoid_ the creation of unneeded arrays. But maybe > I can be convinced with some examples.
I feel that one of the point of the discussion is : although a new (or not so new...) function to create a filled array would be more elegant than the existing pair of functions "np.zeros" and "np.ones", there are maybe not so many usecases for filled arrays *other than zeros values*. I can remember having initialized a non-zero array *some months ago*. For the anecdote it was a vector of discretized vehicule speed values which I wanted to be initialized with a predefined mean speed value prior to some optimization. In that usecase, I really didn't care about the performance of this initialization step. So my overall feeling after this thread is - *yes* a single dedicated fill/init/someverb function would give a slightly better API, - but *no* it's not important because np.empty and np.zeros covers 95 % usecases ! best, Pierre
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
