On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Eric Firing <efiring@hawaii.edu> wrote:
On 2013/06/12 8:13 AM, Warren Weckesser wrote:
> That's why I suggested 'filledwith' (add the underscore if you like).
> This also allows a corresponding masked implementation, 'ma.filledwith',
> without clobbering the existing 'ma.filled'.

Consensus on np.filled? absolutely not, you do not have a consensus.

np.filledwith or filled_with: fine with me, maybe even with
everyone--let's see.  I would prefer the underscore version.

+1 on np.filled_with.  It's unique the meaning is extremely obvious.  We do use np.ma.filled in astropy so a big -1 on deprecating that (which would then require doing numpy version checks to get the right method).  Even when there is an NA dtype the numpy.ma users won't go away anytime soon.

NumPy-Discussion mailing list