On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.har...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Hi All, > > I've implemented several new random integer functions in #6910 > <https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/6910>, to wit > > > - np.random.random_int32 > - np.random.random_int64 > - np.random.random_intp > > These are the minimum functions that I think we need for the numpy 1.11.0 > release, most especially the random_intp function for fuzz testing the > mem_overlap functions. However, there is the question of the best way to > expose the functions. Currently, they are all separately exposed, but it > would also be possible to expose them through a new dtype argument to the > current np.random.random_integers function. Note that all all the new > functions would still be there, but they could be hidden as private > functions. Also, there is the option of adding a complete set comprising > booleans, int8, int16, and the unsigned versions. So the two, not mutually > exclusive, proposed enhancements are > > - expose the new functions through a dtype argument to > random_integers, hide the other functions > > +1 for a single new keyword only and hiding the rest. There's already random.randint and random.random_integers (keyword should be added to both of those). That's already one function too many. Adding even more functions would be very weird. > > - > - expose the new functions through a dtype argument to > random_integers, not hide the other functions > - make a complete set of random integer types > > There is currently no easy way to specify the complete range, so a > proposal for that would be to generate random numbers over the full > possible range of the type if no arguments are specified. That seems like a > fairly natural extension. > I don't understand this point, low/high keywords explicitly say that they use the full available range? > Finally, there is also a proposal to allow broadcasting/element wise > selection of the range. This is the most complicated of the proposed > enhancements and I am not really in favor, but it would be good to hear > from others. > I don't see much of a use-case. Broadcasting multiple keywords together is tricky to implement and use. So for the few users that may need this, a small for loop + array stack should get their job done right? Ralf
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
