On Mon, 24 Jun 2019, at 11:25 PM, Marten van Kerkwijk wrote:
> Just to be sure: for a 1-d array, you'd both consider `.T` giving a shape of
> `(n, 1)` the right behaviour? I.e., it should still change from what it is
> now - which is to leave the shape at `(n,)`.
Just to chime in as a user: v.T should continue to be a silent no-op for 1D
arrays. NumPy makes it arbitrary whether a 1D array is viewed as a row or
column vector, but we often want to write .T to match the notation in a paper
we're implementing.
More deeply, I think .T should never change the number of dimensions of an
array.
I'm ambivalent about the whole discussion in this thread, but generally I think
NumPy should err on the side of caution when deprecating behaviour. It's
unclear to me whether the benefits of making .T transpose only the last two
dimensions outweigh the costs of deprecation. Despite some people's assertion
that those using .T to transpose >2D arrays are probably making a mistake, we
have two perfectly correct uses in scikit-image. These could be easily changed
to .transpose() (honestly they probably should!), but they illustrate that
there is some amount of correct code out there that would be forced to keep up
with an update here.
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
