[Numpy-discussion] Behavior of nan{max, min} and nanarg{max, min} for all-nan slices.

josef.pktd at gmail.com josef.pktd at gmail.com
Wed Oct 2 14:51:31 EDT 2013


On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 2:49 PM,  <josef.pktd at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Stéfan van der Walt <stefan at sun.ac.za> wrote:
>> On 2 Oct 2013 19:14, "Benjamin Root" <ben.root at ou.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> And it is logically consistent, I think.  a[nanargmax(a)] == nanmax(a)
>>> (ignoring the silly detail that you can't do an equality on nans).
>>
>> Why do you call this a silly detail? It seems to me a fundamental flaw to
>> this approach.
>
> a nan is a nan is a NaN
>
>>>> np.testing.assert_equal([0, np.nan], [0, np.nan])
>>>>

and the functions have "nan" in their names
nan in - NaN out

what about nanmean, nansum, ...?

Josef

>
> Josef
>
>>
>> Stéfan
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
>> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
>> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>>



More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list