On 7/8/06, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ed Schofield wrote: > > * Should numpy.rand and numpy.randn accept sequences of dimensions as > > arguments, like rand((3,3)), as an alternative to rand(3,3)? > > > * Should rand((3,3)) and randn((3,3)) continue to raise a TypeError? > > This is a false dichotomy. There are more choices here. > > * Remove rand and randn (at least from the toplevel namespace) and promote the > use of random_sample and standard_normal which already follow the tuple > convention. >
i just wanted to point out another possible choice: * enable numpy.rand((3,3)) and make numpy.rand(3,3) raise an error as zeros and ones do. I suppose that you all discussed a lot about this choice also, but it still seems very reasonable to me :-( pau ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/numpy-discussion
