Hi, > > I can see your point I think, that situation 1 seems to be the more > > common and obvious, and coming at it from outside, you would have > > thought that a.byteswap would change both. > > I think the reason that byteswap behaves the way it does is that for > situation 1 you often don't actually need to do anything. Just > calculate with the things (it'll be a bit slow); as soon as the first > copy gets made you're back to native byte order. So for those times > you need to do it in place it's not too much trouble to byteswap and > adjust the byte order in the dtype (you'd need to inspect the byte > order in the first place to know it was byteswapped...)
Thanks - good point. How about the following suggestion: For the next release: rename byteswap to something like byteswapbuffer deprecate byteswap in favor of byteswapbuffer Update the docstrings to make the distinction between situations clearer. I think that would reduce the clear element of surprise here. Best, Matthew _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
