From: Colin J. W. <cj...@sy...> - 2003-12-05 01:07:46
|
Thanks, I've copied the list here. Colin W. Sebastian Haase wrote: >Hi Colin, >Did you also forget to cc that message to the mailing list - because I just >realized that I send my second mail directly to Perry (only) >[I'm not part of the "numarray-team" - so you would need to resent this >message to the list ...] > >Regards, >Sebastian > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Colin J. Williams" <cj...@sy...> >To: "Sebastian Haase" <ha...@ms...> >Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 4:01 PM >Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] numarray.records - get/set item > > > > >>Sebastian Haase wrote: >> >> >> >>>Hi, >>>Is it maybe a good idea to add this to the definition of 'class Record' >>> >>>class Record: >>> """Class for one single row.""" >>><snip> >>> def __getitem__(self, fieldName): >>> return self.array.field(fieldName)[self.row] >>> def __setitem__(self, fieldName, value): >>> self.array.field(fieldName)[self.row] = value >>> >>>I don't know about the implications if __delitem __ and so on are not >>>defined. >>>I just think it would look quite nice to say >>>myRecArr[0]['mmm'] = 'hallo' >>>as opposed to >>>myRecArr[0].setfield('mmm', 'hallo') >>> >>>Actually I would even like >>>myRecArr[0].mmm = 'hallo' >>> >>>This should be possible by defining __setattr__. >>>It would obviously only work for fieldnames that do not contain '.' or ' >>> >>> >' > > >>>or ... >>> >>>Any comments ? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>I prefer this, it requires fewer key strokes and should be easy to do. >> >>Colin W. >> >> >> >> >> > > > > |