On Di, 2016-09-06 at 13:59 -0400, Marten van Kerkwijk wrote: > In a separate message, since perhaps a little less looney: yet > another > option would be work by analogy with np.ix_ and define pre-dispatch > index preparation routines np.ox_ and np.vx_ (say), which would be > used as in: > ``` > array[np.ox_[:, 10]] -- or -- array[np.vx_[:, 10]] > ``` > This could work if those functions each return something appropriate > for the legacy indexer, or, if that is not possible, a specific > subclass of tuple as a marker that gets interpreted further up. >
A specific subclass of tuple.... Part of me thinks this is horrifying, but it actually would solve some of the subclassing issues if `arr.vindex[...]` could end up calling `__getitem__` with a bit special indexing tuple value. I simply can't quite find the end of subclassing issues. We have tests for things like masked array correctly calling the `_data` subclass, but if the `_data` subclass does not implement the new method, numpy would have to run in circles (or something).... - Sebastian > In the end, though, probably also too complicated. It may remain best > to simply implement the new methods instead and keep it at that! > > -- Marten > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
