At 7:49 PM -0400 2004-06-29, Todd Miller wrote:
On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 17:52, Sebastian Haase wrote:
OK, I'm still trying to get a handle on these record arrays - because I think they are pretty cool, if I could get them to work... Following the code from yesterday (see that posting below) I discovered this: main.ring4ext[0][0] is not the same as main.ring4ext[0,0] is this intended ??
main.ring4ext[0][0] (2308, 76, 272, 1088481152.0, 104.18000030517578, 1994.949951171875) main.ring4ext[0,0] (array([2308, 2309]), array([76, 76]), array([272, 269]), array([ 1.08848115e +09, 1.08848115e+09], type=Float32), array([ 104.18000031, 104.45999908], type=Float32), array([ 1994.94995117, 1994.95996094], type=Float32)) main.ring4ext.shape # yesterday I had this different !!! (20,1) (20, 2)
Any comments are appreciated,
I talked to JC Hsu, the numarray.records author, and he explained that we're probably looking at a limitation of numarray.records: it doesn't yet handle multi-dimensional arrays of records. JC indicated he had replied to Sebastian, but for the benefit of everyone else, that's the deal.
I agree. I have gotten numarray.records to handle multi-dimensional arrays, but it's a terrible pain to create them, str(arry) fails and setting elements of records arrays is painful. I hope at some point they get a major redesign, as they don't actually seem to have been designed to fit in with numarray. The resulting code was so ugly that I gave up and used multiple identically shaped arrays instead. -- Russell