On 4-Jun-09, at 4:38 PM, Anne Archibald wrote: > It seems to me that this is the basic source of the problem. Perhaps > this can be addressed? I realize maintaining compatibility with the > current behaviour is necessary, so how about a multistage deprecation: > > 1. add a keyword argument to intersect1d "assume_unique"; if it is not > present, check for uniqueness and emit a warning if not unique > 2. change the warning to an exception > Optionally: > 3. change the meaning of the function to that of intersect1d_nu if the > keyword argument is not present > > One could do something similar with setmember1d.
+1 on this idea. I've been bitten by the non-unique stuff in the past, especially with setmember1d, not realizing that both need to be unique. David _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
