On 2014/07/06, 4:27 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Eric Firing <efir...@hawaii.edu > <mailto:efir...@hawaii.edu>> wrote: > > (I'm not entirely convinced > np.arr() is a good idea at all; but if it is, it must be kept simple.) > > > If you are going to introduce this functionality, please don't call it > np.arr. > > Right now, np.a<tab> presents you with a whopping 53 completion choices. > Adding "r", narrows that to 21, but np.arr<tab> completes to np.array > right away. Please don't introduce another bump in this road. > > "Namespaces are one honking great idea -- let's do more of those!" > > I would suggest calling it something like np.array_simple or > np.array_from_string, but the best choice IMO, would be > np.ndarray.from_string (a static constructor method).
I think the problem is that this defeats the point: minimizing typing when doing an off-the-cuff demo or test. I don't know that this use case justifies the clutter, regardless of what it is called; but evidently there is some demand for it. Eric > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
