[Numpy-discussion] Masked Array for NumPy 1.7
Charles R Harris
charlesr.harris at gmail.com
Sun May 20 04:48:55 EDT 2012
On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 11:38 PM, Travis Oliphant <travis at continuum.io>wrote:
> On May 20, 2012, at 12:15 AM, Charles R Harris wrote:
> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 10:48 PM, Travis Oliphant <travis at continuum.io>wrote:
>> > My own plan for the near term would be as follows:
>> > 1) Put in the experimental option and get the 1.7 release out. This
>> gets us through the next couple of months and keeps things moving.
>> The "experimental" option does not solve the problem which is that the
>> ndarray object now has masked fields which changes the fundamental nature
>> of an ndarray for a lot of downstream users that really have no idea what
>> has just happened. I don't see how this has been addressed by any
>> proposal except for the one I have suggested which allows a masked array
>> object and a regular ndarray to co-exist for a time. I doubt that the
>> proposal actually helps get 1.7 out any faster either as there are multiple
>> experimental APIs that would have to be created to pull it off on both the
>> C and Python level.
> So, remove them in 1.8 and try something else. With experimental (say in
> site.cfg), the base array could even be different. I don't see the problem
> here. Think big.
> I don't think I understand your mental model of this. Are you saying
> add an experimental flag at the C-level (essentially a #define that
> eliminates any code involving masked arrays unless the define is made at
> compile time?)
> It seems like just applying Nathaniel's patch would be a better approach.
Do so then. Otherwise I am going to fork.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion