On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 10:17 PM Kirill Balunov <kirillbalunov@gmail.com> wrote:
вт, 25 июн. 2019 г. в 21:20, Cameron Blocker <cameronjblocker@gmail.com>:
It seems to me that the general consensus is that we shouldn't be changing .T to do what we've termed matrix transpose or conjugate transpose.
Reading through this thread, I can not say that I have the same opinion - at first, many looked positively at the possibility of change - `arr.T` to mean a transpose of the last two dimensions by default, and then people start discussing several different (albeit related) topics at once. So, I want to point out that it is rather difficult to follow what is currently discussed in this thread, probably because several different (albeit related) topics are being discussed at once. I would suggest at first discuss `arr.T` change, because other topics somewhat depend on that (`arr.MT`/`arr.CT`/`arr.H` and others).
Perhaps not full consensus between the many people with different opinions and interests. But for the first one, arr.T change: it's clear that this won't happen. Between Juan's examples of valid use, and what Stephan and Matthew said, there's not much more to add. We're not going to change correct code for minor benefits.
p.s: Documentation about `.T` shows only two examples, for 1d - to show that it works and for 2d case. Maybe it means something? (especially for new `numpy` users. )
That only means that there's a limit to the number of examples we've managed to put in docstrings. Ralf