Reputation: 8659
So why is the NumPy transpose .T
faster than np.transpose()
?
b = np.arange(10)
#Transpose .T
t=b.reshape(2,5).T
#Transpose function
t = np.transpose(b.reshape(2,5))
#Transpose function without wrapper
t = b.reshape(2,5).transpose()
I did a timeit
of both in Jupyter:
%timeit -n 1000 b.reshape(2,5).T
1000 loops, best of 3: 391 ns per loop
%timeit -n 1000 np.transpose(b.reshape(2,5))
1000 loops, best of 3: 600 ns per loop
%timeit -n 1000 b.reshape(2,5).transpose()
1000 loops, best of 3: 422 ns per loop
and to check scaleablility I did a larger matrix:
b = np.arange( 100000000)
%timeit -n 1000 b.reshape(10000,10000).T
1000 loops, best of 3: 390 ns per loop
%timeit -n 1000 np.transpose(b.reshape(10000,10000))
1000 loops, best of 3: 611 ns per loop
%timeit -n 1000 b.reshape(10000,10000).transpose()
1000 loops, best of 3: 435 ns per loop
In both cases the .T
method about 2x faster than the wrapper and a bit faster than using .transpose()
why is this? Is there a use case where np.transpose
would be better?
Upvotes: 0
Views: 5605
Reputation: 40878
One reason might be that np.transpose(a)
just calls a.transpose()
internally, while a.transpose()
is more direct. In the source you have:
def transpose(a, axes=None):
return _wrapfunc(a, 'transpose', axes)
Where _wrapfunc
in turn is just:
def _wrapfunc(obj, method, *args, **kwds):
try:
return getattr(obj, method)(*args, **kwds)
except (AttributeError, TypeError):
return _wrapit(obj, method, *args, **kwds)
This maps to getattr(a, 'transpose')
in this case. _wrapfunc
is used by many of the module-level functions to access methods, usually of the ndarray
class or whatever is the class of the first arg.
(Note: .T
is the same as .transpose()
, except that the array is returned if it has <2 dimensions.)
Upvotes: 3