Sebastian,
I think the core issue you pointed out is indeed correct, but your detailed
explanation is backwards, since `maximum(arr[:, 0], arr[:, 1])` implements
`arr.max(axis=1)` instead of `arr.max(axis=0)`. So OP's transpose method is
essentially approach 1, which for this array shape has less
The next NumPy community meeting will be held this Wednesday, March 26th at
18:00 UTC.
Join us via Zoom:
https://numfocus-org.zoom.us/j/83278611437?pwd=ekhoLzlHRjdWc0NOY2FQM0NPemdkZz09
Everyone is welcome and encouraged to attend.
To add to the meeting agenda the topics you’d like to discuss, follo
Very interesting! Thanks for the quick response!
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/
Member
On Fri, 2025-03-21 at 23:22 +0100, Tiziano Zito via NumPy-Discussion
wrote:
> Hi George,
>
> what you see is due to the memory layout of numpy arrays. If you
> switch your array to F-order you'll see that the two functions have
> the same timings, i.e. both are fast (on my machine 25 times faster
