Re: [Numpy-discussion] rand argument question

[Alan G I. <ai...@am...>]

On Fri, 02 Jun 2006, Sven Schreiber apparently wrote:=20
> why doesn't rand accept a shape tuple as argument?  I find=20
> the difference between the argument types of rand and (for=20
> example) zeros somewhat confusing.  ... Can anybody offer=20
> an intuition/explanation?=20

Backward compatability, I believe.  You are not alone in=20
finding this odd and inconsistent.  I am hoping for a change=20
by 1.0, but I am not very hopeful.

Robert always points out that if you want the consistent=20
interface, you can always import functions from the 'random'=20
module.  I have never been able to understand this as=20
a response to the point you are making.

I take it the core argument goes something like this:
- rand and randn are convenience functions
        * if you do not find them convenient, don't use them
- they are in wide use, so it is too late to change them
- testing the first argument to see whether it is a tuple or=20
  an int so aesthetically objectionable that its ugliness=20
  outweighs the benefits users might get from access to=20
  a more consistent interface

This is one place where I believe a forward looking (i.e.,=20
think about new users) vision would force a small change in=20
these *convenience* functions that will have payoffs both in=20
ease of use and in eliminating this recurrent question from=20
discussion lists.

Cheers,
Alan Isaac