great news with regards to OpenCV support...

[Ralf Gommers]

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 11:42 PM, Chris Colbert <sccolbert at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Damian Eads <eads at soe.ucsc.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Chris Colbert <sccolbert at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> So my next question is: how much hand holding should I do on my end
> >> for the user?
> >>
> >> There are several things I would like to address here:
> >>
> >> - opencv makes extensive use of *out arguments, should we require the
> user to
> >>  preallocate their out array or should we make it for them and return
> it.
> >>  The latter option is more pythonic, but comes with a small overhead for
> >>  determining a proper return dtype
> >
> > I think having out be None by default is best.
> >
>
> That's how i've been going about it so far, but that obviously incurs
> an overhead of determining, exactly if and what to return.
>

Doing it the same as for ufuncs would make sense I think. Is that what you
mean by "having out None"? The overhead should be small compared to most
operations on images.

Ufuncs return a view on `out` if given by the user. scipy.ndimage returns
None in that case. I think returning a view is more convenient.

Cheers,
Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/scikit-image/attachments/20091009/56c21b8f/attachment.html>