[Numpy-discussion] consensus (was: NA masks in the next numpy release?)
Charles R Harris
Fri Oct 28 18:21:21 CDT 2011
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Matthew Brett <email@example.com>wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Charles R Harris
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > 2011/10/28 Stéfan van der Walt <email@example.com>
> >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Benjamin Root <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> > The space issues was never ignored and Mark left room for that to be
> >> > addressed. Parameterized dtypes can still be added (and isn't all
> >> > different from multi-na). Perhaps I could be convinced of a having
> >> > assignments mean "ignore" and np.NA mean "absent". How far off are we
> >> > really from consensus?
> >> Do you know whether Mark is around? I think his feedback would be
> >> useful at this point; having written the code, he'll be able to
> >> evaluate some of the technical suggestions made.
> > Yes, Mark is around, but I assume he is interested in his school work at
> > this point. And he might not be inclined to get back into this particular
> > discussion. I don't feel he was treated very well by some last time
> We have not always been good at separating the concept of disagreement
> from that of rudeness.
> As I've said before, one form of rudeness (and not disagreement) is
> ignoring people.
> We should all be careful to point out - respectfully, and with reasons
> - when we find our colleagues replies (or non-replies) to be rude,
> because rudeness is very bad for the spirit of open discussion.
Trying things out in preparation for discussion is also a mark of respect.
Have you worked with the current implementation?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion