[Numpy-discussion] Splitting MaskedArray into a separate package

[Matthew Brett]

Hi,


On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 9:51 PM, Stefan van der Walt
<stefanv at berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> On May 23, 2018 13:25:44 Eric Firing <efiring at hawaii.edu> wrote:
>
>> On 2018/05/23 9:06 AM, Matti Picus wrote:
>> I understand at least some of the motivation and potential advantages,
>> but as it stands, I find this NEP highly alarming.
>
>
> I am not at my computer right now, so I will respond in more detail later.
> But I wanted to address your statement above:
>
> I see a NEP as an opportunity to discuss and flesh out an idea, and I
> certainly hope that you there's no reason for alarm.
>
> I do not expect to know whether this is a good idea before discussions
> conclude, so I appreciate your feedback. If we cannot find good support for
> the idea, with very specific benefits, it should simply be dropped.
>
> But, I think there's a lot to learn from the conversation in the meantime
> w.r.t. exactly how streamlined people want NumPy to be, how core
> functionality can perhaps be strengthened by becoming a customer of our own
> API, how to optimally maintain sub-components, etc.

Can I ask what the plans are for supporting missing values, inside or
outside numpy?  Is there are successor to MaskedArray - and is this
part of the succession plan?

Cheers,

Matthew