Hi,
due to popular demand, I have updated unique1d() to optionally return
both kinds of indices:
In [3]: b, i, j = nm.unique1d( a, return_index=True, return_inverse=True )
In [4]: a
Out[4]: array([1, 1, 8, 3, 3, 5, 4])
In [6]: b
Out[6]: array([1, 3, 4, 5, 8])
In [7]: a[i]
Out[7]: array([1,
Hi Robert
2008/8/6 Robert Cimrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Note also that the order of outputs has changed (previously unique1d()
> returned (i, b) for return_index=True).
Does this not constitute an API change?
Stéfan
___
Numpy-discussion mailing list
N
Hi Stéfan,
Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
> Hi Robert
>
> 2008/8/6 Robert Cimrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Note also that the order of outputs has changed (previously unique1d()
>> returned (i, b) for return_index=True).
>
> Does this not constitute an API change?
It does. Are there many users of un
2008/8/11 Robert Cimrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> Note also that the order of outputs has changed (previously unique1d()
>>> returned (i, b) for return_index=True).
>>
>> Does this not constitute an API change?
>
> It does. Are there many users of unique1d( a, return_index=True ) out there?
>
> The
Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
> 2008/8/11 Robert Cimrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Note also that the order of outputs has changed (previously unique1d()
returned (i, b) for return_index=True).
>>> Does this not constitute an API change?
>> It does. Are there many users of unique1d( a, return_ind
Robert Cimrman wrote:
> Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
>> 2008/8/11 Robert Cimrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Note also that the order of outputs has changed (previously unique1d()
> returned (i, b) for return_index=True).
Does this not constitute an API change?
>>> It does. Are there many use
2008/8/13 Robert Cimrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Yeah, that's why I think not many people used the extra return anyway.
>> I will do as you say unless somebody steps in.
>
> ... but not before August 25, as I am about to leave on holidays and
> have not managed to do it yet. I do not want to mess w
Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
> 2008/8/13 Robert Cimrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> Yeah, that's why I think not many people used the extra return anyway.
>>> I will do as you say unless somebody steps in.
>> ... but not before August 25, as I am about to leave on holidays and
>> have not managed to do
