Re: [Numpy-discussion] New Indexing Methods Revival #N (subclasses!)

p.s. Just to be clear: personally, I think we should have neither `__numpy_getitem__` nor a mixin; we should just get the quite wonderful new indexing methods! ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New Indexing Methods Revival #N (subclasses!)

Hi Nathan, The question originally posed is whether `ndarray` should provide that single method as a convenience already, even though it doesn't actually use it itself. Do you think that is useful, i.e., a big advantage over overwriting the new oindex, vindex, and another that I forget? My own

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New Indexing Methods Revival #N (subclasses!)

On Monday, September 5, 2016, Marten van Kerkwijk wrote: > Hi Sebastian, > > It would seem to me that any subclass has to keep up to date with new > features in ndarray, and while I think ndarray has a responsibility > not to break backward compatibility, I do not

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New Indexing Methods Revival #N (subclasses!)

Actually, on those names: an alternative to your proposal would be to introduce only one new method which can do all types of indexing, depending on a keyword argument, i.e., something like ``` def getitem(self, item, mode='outer'): ... ``` -- Marten

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New Indexing Methods Revival #N (subclasses!)

Hi Sebastian, It would seem to me that any subclass has to keep up to date with new features in ndarray, and while I think ndarray has a responsibility not to break backward compatibility, I do not think it has to protect against new features possibly not working as expected in subclasses. In

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New Indexing Methods Revival #N (subclasses!)

On Mo, 2016-09-05 at 14:54 -0400, Marten van Kerkwijk wrote: > Hi Sebastian, > > Indeed, having the scalar pass through `__array_wrap__` would have > been useful (_finalize__ is too late, since one cannot change the > class any more, just set attributes).  But that is water under the > bridge,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] New Indexing Methods Revival #N (subclasses!)

Hi Sebastian, Indeed, having the scalar pass through `__array_wrap__` would have been useful (_finalize__ is too late, since one cannot change the class any more, just set attributes). But that is water under the bridge, since we're stuck with people not expecting that. I think the slightly

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Correct error of invalid axis arguments.

On Mo, 2016-09-05 at 11:54 -0600, Charles R Harris wrote: > Hi All, > > At the moment there are two error types raised when invalid axis > arguments are encountered: IndexError and ValueError. I prefer > ValueError for arguments, IndexError seems more appropriate when the > bad axis value is used

[Numpy-discussion] Correct error of invalid axis arguments.

Hi All, At the moment there are two error types raised when invalid axis arguments are encountered: IndexError and ValueError. I prefer ValueError for arguments, IndexError seems more appropriate when the bad axis value is used as an index. In any case, having mixed error types is inconvenient,