[Numpy-discussion] Sparse matrix hooks
Ed Schofield
schofield at ftw.at
Mon Feb 27 06:41:08 EST 2006
Pearu Peterson wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Ed Schofield wrote:
>> Yes, we've defined __rmul__, and this works fine for dense arrays, whose
>> __mul__ raises an exception. The problem is that matrix.__mul__ calls
>> dot(), which doesn't raise an exception, but rather creates an oddball
>> object array:
>>
>> matrix([[ (1, 0) 0.0
>> (2, 1) 0.0
>> (3, 0) 0.0,
>> (1, 0) 0.0
>> (2, 1) 0.0
>> (3, 0) 0.0,
>> (1, 0) 0.0
>> (2, 1) 0.0
>> (3, 0) 0.0]], dtype=object)
>>
>>
>> We could potentially modify the __mul__ function of numpy's matrix
>> objects to make a guess about whether an array constructed out of the
>> argument will somehow be sane or whether, like here, it should raise an
>> exception. But this would be difficult to get right, since the sparse
>> matrix formats are quite varied (some supporting the map/sequence
>> protocols, some not, etc.). But being able to test isinstance(arg,
>> spmatrix) would make this easy.
>
> Sure, isinstance(arg,spmatrix) would work but it is not a general
> solution for performing binary operations with matrices and such user
> defined objects that numpy is not aware of. But these objects may be
> aware of numpy matrices or arrays. Sparse matrix is one example. Other
> example is defining a symbolic matrix. Etc.
> So, IMHO matrix.__mul__ (or dot) should be fixed instead.
Ah, yes, this could be the simplest solution (at least to the __mul__
problem). We could redefine matrix.__mul__ as
def __mul__(self, other):
if isinstance(other, N.ndarray) or not hasattr(other, '__rmul__') \
or N.isscalar(other):
return N.dot(self, other)
else:
return NotImplemented
This seems to fix multiplication. I may make a case later for sparse
matrix hooks for other functions, but I don't see a pressing need right
now. ;)
-- Ed
More information about the NumPy-Discussion
mailing list