On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Chris Barker <chris.bar...@noaa.gov> > wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Charles R Harris < >> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Apropos column/row vectors, I've toyed a bit with the idea of adding a >>> flag to numpy arrays to indicate that the last index is one or the other, >>> and maybe neither. >>> >> >> I don't follow this. wouldn't it ony be an issue for 1D arrays, rather >> than the "last index". Or maybe I'm totally missing the point. >> >> But anyway, are (N,1) and (1, N) arrays insufficient for representing >> column and row vectors for some reason? If not -- then we have a way to >> express a column or row vector, we just need an easier and more obvious way >> to create them. >> >> *maybe* we could have actual column and row vector classes -- they would >> BE regular arrays, with (1,N) or (N,1) dimensions, and act the same in >> every way except their __repr__. and we're provide handy factor functions >> for them. >> >> These were needed to complete the old Matrix class -- which is no longer >> needed now that we have @ (i.e. a 2D array IS a matrix) >> > > One problem with that approach is that `vrow @ vcol` has dimension 1 x 1, > which is not a scalar. > I think it's not supposed to be a scalar, if @ breaks on scalars `vrow @ vcol @ a Josef` > > Chuck > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
