Anne Archibald wrote: > The appropriate spelling for this, in modern pythons, is > > class X: > @vectorize > def func(self, n): > return 2*n > > Not that it makes it work any better. > > There's no reason vectorize couldn't be made to do the Right Thing > when handed (bound and unbound) methods, for example by examining > X.func.im_self, X.func.im_class and X.func.im_func attributes.
This magic is well above my current level of expertise in Python, but perhaps one day I'll try to do it. Thanks for pointing me in this direction. > I can't imagine a situation where a method would want to be vectorized > over its self parameter, or at least, not by default. Yes, I agree. I thought it would be harmless, though. Anyway, since it seems it is not possible to vectorize() a method with today's NumPy, I think the class' docstring, which says "[...] somefunction -- a Python function or method" is rather misleading. Perhaps it ought to be changed? Best regards, Wojciech Smigaj _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
