Colin J. Williams wrote:
Travis Oliphant wrote:
I've committed the data-type change discussed at the end of last week to the SVN repository. Now the concept of a data type for an array has been replaced with a "data-descriptor". This data-descriptor is flexible enough to handle an arbitrary record specification with fields that include records and arrays or arrays of records. While nesting may not be the best data-layout for a new design, when memory-mapping an arbitrary fixed-record-length file, this capability allows you to handle even the most obsure record file.
Does this mean that the dtype parameter is changed? obscure??
No, it's not changed. The dtype parameter is still used and it is still called the same thing. It's just that what constitutes a data-type has changed significantly. For example now tuples and dictionaries can be used to describe a data-type. These definitions are recursive so that whenever data-type is used it means anything that can be interpreted as a data-type. And I really mean data-descriptor, but data-type is in such common usage that I still use it. Tuple: ======== (fixed-size-data-type, shape) (generic-size-data-type, itemsize) (base-type-data-type, new-type-data-type) Examples: dtype=(int32, (5,5)) --- a 5x5 array of int32 is the description of this item. dtype=(str, 10) --- a length-10 string dtype=(int16, {'real':(int8,0),'imag':(int8,4)} --- a descriptor that acts like an int16 array mathematically (in ufuncs) but has real and imag fields. Dictionary (defaults to a dtypechar == 'V') ========== format1: {"names": list-of-field-names, "formats": list of data-types, <optionally> "offsets" : list of start-of-the-field "titles" : extra field names } format2 (and how it's stored internally) {key1 : (data-type1, offset1 [, title1]), key2 : (data-type2, offset2 [, title2]), ... keyn : (data-typen, offsetn [, titlen]) } Other objects not already covered: ===================== ???? Right now, it just passes the tp_dict of the typeobject to the dictionary-conversion routine. I'm open for ideas here and will probably have better ideas once the actual record data-type (not data-descriptor but actual subclass of the scipy.void data type) looks like. All of these can be used as the dtype parameter wherever it is taken (of course you can't always do something useful with every data-descriptor). When an ndarray has an associated type descriptor with fields (that's where the field information is stored), then those fields can be accessed using string or unicode keys to the getitem call. Thus, you can do something like this:
a = ones((4,3), dtype=(int16, {'real':(int8, 0), 'imag':(int8, 1)})) a['imag'] = 2 a['real'] = 1 a.tostring() '\x01\x02\x01\x02\x01\x02\x01\x02\x01\x02\x01\x02\x01\x02\x01\x02\x01\x02\x01\x02\x01\x02\x01\x02'
Note that there are now three distinct but interacting Python objects: 1) the N-dimensional array of a fixed itemsize. 2) a Python object representing one element of the array. 3) the data-descriptor object describing the data-type of the array. These three things were always there under the covers (the PyArray_Descr* has been there since Numeric), and the standard Python types were always filling in for number 2. Now we are just being more explicit about it. Now, all three things are present and accounted for. I'm really quite happy with the resulting infrastructure. I think it will allow some really neat possibilities. I'm thinking the record array subclass will allow attribute-based look-up and register a nice record type for the actual "element" in of the record array. -Travis