read(): don't ignore frames if out is given?#46
Merged
Conversation
Owner
|
I don't see any harm in this. Looks good. By the way, you can see an up-to-date version of the (ongoing) test rewrite in the tests branch. Feel free to add your own. I am removing |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We already discussed this in #37 and the current behavior is this:
If both
framesandoutare specified inread(), the value offramesis silently ignored (same withdtypeandalways_2d).While implementing the
blocks()feature (#35), however, I found that it may be better to change this behavior slightly.What about not ignoring
frames?That would mean if
framesis smaller than the length ofout, it is taken into account, if it is larger, it would still be ignored.This would be similar to the default Python indexing behavior, where an index larger than the maximum index is silently truncated to the maximum index.
dtypeandalways_2dwould still be ignored.Is this a bad idea?
I didn't add tests to not interfere with the py.test rewrite, but we should add some test cases for this afterwards.