Sun Oct 30 13:29:00 CDT 2011
On 10/29/11 2:48 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> That's true, but I am hoping that the difference between - say:
> a[0:2] = np.NA
> a.mask[0:2] = False
> would be easy enough to imagine.
> It is in this case. I agree the explicit ``a.mask`` is clearer.
Interesting -- I suspect I'm mirror's Pandas' users here:
a[0:2] = np.NA
is simpler and easier to me -- I'm avoiding the word "clearer" because I
m not sure what it means -- if we thin it's important for the user to
understand that the NA value is implemented with a mask, then setting
the mask explicitly is certainly clearer -- but I don't think that's
important. Indeed, I still like the idea that for "casual" use, NA could
be a special value, and could be a mask, and that the user does not need
to know the difference.
Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax
Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception
More information about the NumPy-Discussion