You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
At PyData SV, @mrocklin suggested that by default, array broadcasting should fall back on numpy's shape based broadcasting. This would also simplify directly constructing DataArray objects (#115).
The trick will be to make this work with xray's internals, which currently assume that dimensions are always named by strings.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As I think more about this one, I'm questioning the value of allowing for unnamed dimensions, as opposed to simply defaulting to dimension names like "dim_0", "dim_1", etc.
In particular, unnamed dimensions are not very useful on object which use indices for alignment. To do sensible numpy like broadcasting, you need to be able to insert size 1 dimensions. But since we always have tick labels, we can't automatically expand those size 1 dimensions to the size of the dimension in the other array.
I suppose we could also make tick labels optional, which would make reshape operations or np.newaxis sensible. But I think I would rather still default to np.arange(size) like pandas.
At PyData SV, @mrocklin suggested that by default, array broadcasting should fall back on numpy's shape based broadcasting. This would also simplify directly constructing DataArray objects (#115).
The trick will be to make this work with xray's internals, which currently assume that dimensions are always named by strings.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: