Re: RFC 272 (v1) Arrays: transpose()

Jeremy Howard wrote:
> 
> Karl Glazebrook wrote:
> > Jeremy Howard wrote:
> > >
> > > BTW, I notice that you're using dimension numbering starting at 0 for
> your
> > > transpose() examples. Is everyone happy to start at 0 rather than 1?
> >
> > OF COURSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
> > anything else would be WRONG
> >
> Well, one can't argue with logic like that! ;-)
> 
> (I don't mind either way... we can either be consistent with reshape and
> :shape (starts at 1) or indexing (starts at 0) but not both...)

Well if a dimension has N elements then the numbering of the elements
runs 0...N-1

similarly if the shape has M dimensions, then the numbering of the
dimensions is 0..M-1

the arguments to reshape should be sizes not last elements (i.e. N's
not N-1's).

I think this is logically consisteny and is now PDL does it.

How does this sound?

Karl