On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:

I think the masked array code is also due a cleanup/rationalization. Any comments you have along that line are welcome.

Here are a few thoughts:

1. Please avoid another major rewrite.

2. Stop pretending that instances of ma.MaskedArray and ndarray have "is a" relationship.  Use of inheritance should become an implementation detail and any method that is not explicitly overridden should raise an exception.

3. Add a mechanism to keep numpy and numpy.ma APIs in sync.  At a minimum - add a test comparing public functions and methods and for pure python functions compare signatures.

4. Consider deprecating the ma.masked scalar.

5. Support duck-typing in MaskedArray constructors.  If supplied data object has mask attribute it should be used as mask.  This will allow interoperability with alternative missing values implementations.  (ndarray may itself grow mask attribute one day which will be equivalent to isnan.  Bit views, anyone?) 

_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion