On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 7:20 AM Todd <toddr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:35 AM Juan Nunez-Iglesias <jni.s...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> 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. >> > > Why should it be silent? This is a source of bugs. At least in my > experience, generally when people write v.T it is a mistake. Either they > are coming from another language that works differently, or they failed to > properly check their function arguments. And if you are doing it on > purpose, you are doing something you know is a no-op for essentially > documentation purposes, and I would think that is the sort of thing you > need to make as explicit as possible. "Errors should never pass silently. > Unless explicitly silenced." >
Writing v.T is also sensible if you're writing code that could apply equally well to either a single vector or a stack of vectors. This mirrors the behavior of @, which also allows either single vectors or stacks of vectors (matrices) with the same syntax.
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
