Re: [Numpy-discussion] possible bug with numpy.object_

[Stefan v. d. W. <st...@su...>]

On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 10:49:58AM -0600, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Matt Knox wrote:
> > is the following behaviour expected? or is this a bug with=20
> > numpy.object_  ?  I'm using numpy 1.0b1
> > =20
> > >>> print numpy.array([],numpy.float64).size
> > 0
> >
> > >>> print numpy.array([],numpy.object_).size
> > 1
> >
> > Should the size of an array initialized from an empty list not always=
=20
> > be 1 ? or am I just crazy?
> > =20
> Not in this case.  Explictly creating an object array from any object=20
> (even the empty-list object) gives you a 0-d array containing that=20
> object.   When you explicitly create an object array a different sectio=
n=20
> of code handles it and gives this result.  This is a recent change, and=
=20
> I don't think this use-case was considered as a backward incompatibilit=
y=20
> (which I believe it is).   Perhaps we should make it so array([],....)=20
> always returns an empty array.   I'm not sure.   Comments?

The current behaviour makes sense, but is maybe not consistent:

N.array([],dtype=3Dobject).size =3D=3D 1
N.array([[],[]],dtype=3Dobject).size =3D=3D 2

Regards
St=E9fan