[Numpy-discussion] Separating out the maskna code
njs at pobox.com
Tue May 22 04:30:22 EDT 2012
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:34 AM, Travis Oliphant <travis at continuum.io> wrote:
> Just to be clear. Are we waiting for the conclusion of the PyArray_Diagonal PR before proceeding with this one?
We can talk about this one and everyone's welcome to look at the
patch, of course. (In fact it'd be useful if anyone catches any issues
now, so I can roll them into the final rebase.) But I'll rebase it
again after the PyArray_diagonal thing has been sorted to sort out
conflicts, and also fix some docs that I missed, so I don't want to
create an actual PR yet.
> On May 20, 2012, at 1:06 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>> On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Nathaniel Smith <njs at pobox.com> wrote:
>>>> I have not reviewed it in detail, but in general I would be very supportive of your plan to commit this to master, make a 1.7 release (without the ReduceWrapper) function and then work on the masked array / ndarray separation plan for 1.8
>>>> Of course, first I would want to hear from Mark, to hear his comments about what was removed.
>>> Definitely. I'm pretty sure I didn't accidentally sweep up anything
>>> else in my net besides what it says in the commit messages (simply
>>> because it's hard to do that when all you're doing is grepping for
>>> HASMASKNA and friends), but he knows this code better than I do.
>> Also on that note, if someone can merge the PyArray_Diagonal PR then I
>> can sort out the conflicts and then make a PR for this, to make review
>> - N
>> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
>> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
More information about the NumPy-Discussion