On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Pierre GM <pgmdevl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Francesc, you're overestimating my knowledge of C... Can we stick to the > Python implementation ? > Here's the catch: IIUC, each individual element of a nD structured array is a > void, provided the element can be accessed, ie that n>0. A 0D array cannot be > indexed, so I don't know how
Unless someone can explain why it isn't, this sounds like an API inconsistency, which in turn I would characterize as a bug. But others may disagree and/or explain it away... > capture the object below. The sad trick I found was to do a .reshape(1)[0], > but that looks really overkill... > >> >> The standard way (more or less) works for me: >> >>>>> class myvoidclass(np.void): >> ... pass >> ... > > David, what do you do w/ the __new__ of myvoidclass ? Just an empty class > doesn't help me much, 'm'fraid. Presumably, whatever you want (i.e., override it, calling the base class constructor inside your __new__ if/when needed) - I've never done this, so I have no reason to believe it would/should behave any differently than any other Python subclass; your question merely provoked me to check to see if the normal subclassing syntax did not work for some reason, and since I found that it did, I thought I'd post that result as a "data point". Now, if you're generally unfamiliar (but it doesn't sound like you are) with what to do with a subclass' __new__, I'm sure someone else can more easily point you to a reference for that issue. Is there some reason you believe you have to override __new__ differently in your use-case? DG > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
