Re: [Numpy-discussion] Superfluous array transpose (cf. ticket #1054)

2009-03-16 Thread Pearu Peterson
On Sun, March 15, 2009 8:57 pm, Sturla Molden wrote: Regarding ticket #1054. What is the reason for this strange behaviour? a = np.zeros((10,10),order='F') a.flags C_CONTIGUOUS : False F_CONTIGUOUS : True OWNDATA : True WRITEABLE : True ALIGNED : True UPDATEIFCOPY : False

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Superfluous array transpose (cf. ticket #1054)

2009-03-16 Thread Sturla Molden
On 3/16/2009 9:27 AM, Pearu Peterson wrote: If a operation produces new array then the new array should have the storage properties of the lhs operand. That would not be enough, as 1+a would behave differently from a+1. The former would change storage order and the latter would not.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Superfluous array transpose (cf. ticket #1054)

2009-03-16 Thread Pearu Peterson
On Mon, March 16, 2009 4:05 pm, Sturla Molden wrote: On 3/16/2009 9:27 AM, Pearu Peterson wrote: If a operation produces new array then the new array should have the storage properties of the lhs operand. That would not be enough, as 1+a would behave differently from a+1. The former would

[Numpy-discussion] Superfluous array transpose (cf. ticket #1054)

2009-03-15 Thread Sturla Molden
Regarding ticket #1054. What is the reason for this strange behaviour? a = np.zeros((10,10),order='F') a.flags C_CONTIGUOUS : False F_CONTIGUOUS : True OWNDATA : True WRITEABLE : True ALIGNED : True UPDATEIFCOPY : False (a+1).flags C_CONTIGUOUS : True F_CONTIGUOUS : False

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Superfluous array transpose (cf. ticket #1054)

2009-03-15 Thread Pauli Virtanen
Sun, 15 Mar 2009 19:57:10 +0100, Sturla Molden wrote: Regarding ticket #1054. What is the reason for this strange behaviour? a = np.zeros((10,10),order='F') a.flags C_CONTIGUOUS : False F_CONTIGUOUS : True OWNDATA : True WRITEABLE : True ALIGNED : True UPDATEIFCOPY : False