On 20 Aug 2013 12:53, <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:47 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:34 AM, Nathaniel Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 20 Aug 2013 12:09, <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Nathaniel Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > On 20 Aug 2013 01:39, "Joe Kington" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> ...<snip> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> However, my first interpretation of an axis argument in unique would > >>> >>> be that it treats each column (or whatever along axis) separately. > >>> >>> Analogously to max, argmax and similar. > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> Good point! > >>> >> > >>> >> That's certainly a potential source of confusion. However, I can't > >>> >> seem > >>> >> to come up with a better name for the kwarg. Matlab's "unique" function > >>> >> has > >>> >> a "rows" option, which is probably a more intuitive name, but doesn't > >>> >> imply > >>> >> the expansion to N-dimensions. > >>> >> > >>> >> "axis" is still fairly idiomatic, despite the confusion over "unique > >>> >> rows/columns/etc" vs "unique items within each row/column/etc". > >>> >> > >>> >> Any thoughts on a better name for the argument? > >>> > > >>> > I also found this pretty confusing when first looking at the PR. > >>> > > >>> > One option might be to invert the sense of the argument to emphasize > >>> > that > >>> > it's treating subarrays as units, so instead of specifying the iteration > >>> > axis you specify the axes of the subarray. compare_axis= or something? > >>> > >>> you would need compare_axes (plural for ndim>2) and have to specify > >>> all but one axis, AFAICS. > >> > >> Well, it makes sense to specify any arbitrary subset of axes, whether or not > >> that's currently implemented. > > > > not AFAICS, if you want to return a rectangular array without > > nans/missing values. > > and unless you want to ravel() the remaining axis, which is also weird > (I think).
The default (and until this patch, only) behaviour is to ravel all axes, so it'd be consistent. -n
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
