[Numpy-discussion] Proposal: add ndarray.keys() to return dtype.names

Eelco Hoogendoorn hoogendoorn.eelco at gmail.com
Wed Oct 1 10:13:17 EDT 2014

Well, the method will have to be present on all ndarrays, since structured
arrays do not have a different type from regular arrays, only a different
dtype. Thus the attribute has to be present regardless, but some Exception
will have to be raised depending on the dtype, to make it quack like the
kind of duck it is, so to speak. Indeed it seems like an atypical design
pattern; but I don't see a problem with it.

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 4:08 PM, John Zwinck <jzwinck at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 1 Oct 2014 04:30, "Stephan Hoyer" <shoyer at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Eelco Hoogendoorn <
> hoogendoorn.eelco at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On more careful reading of your words, I think we agree; indeed, if
> keys() is present is should return an iterable; but I don't think it should
> be present for non-structured arrays.
> >
> > Indeed, I think we do agree. The attribute can simply be missing (e.g.,
> accessing it raises AttributeError) for non-structured arrays.
> I'm generally fine with this, though I would like to know if there is
> precedent for methods being present on structured arrays only.  Even if
> there is no precedent I am still OK with the idea, I just think we should
> understand if how novel this will be.
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20141001/f0e6146a/attachment.html>

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list