[Numpy-discussion] Add guaranteed no-copy to array creation and reshape?

[Todd]

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 01:55 Eric Wieser <wieser.eric+numpy at gmail.com wrote:

> Slicing is a lot more important than some keyword. And design-wise,
> filling the numpy namespace with singletons for keyword to other things in
> that same namespace just makes no sense to me.
>
> At least from the perspective of discoverability, you could argue that
> string constants form a namespace of their won, and so growing the “string”
> namespace is not inherently better than growing any other. The main flaw in
> that comparison is that picking np.never_copy to be a singleton forever
> prevents us reusing that name to become a function.
>
> Perhaps the solution is to use np.NEVER_COPY instead - that’s never going
> to clash with a function name we want to add in future, and using upper
> attributes as arguments in that way is pretty typical for python (
> subprocess.PIPE, socket.SOCK_STREAM, etc…)
>

What about a namespace as someone mentioned earlier.  Perhaps
`np.flags.NO_COPY`

You could fairly argue that this approach is outdated in the face of
> enum.Enum - in which case we could go for the more heavy-handed
> np.CopyMode.NEVER, which still has a unique enough case for name clashes
> with functions never to be an issue.
>
> Eric
>

Would all three conditions be supported this way or only `NEVER`?

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20190110/9ec57787/attachment-0001.html>