[Numpy-discussion] numpy.filled, again
Chris Barker - NOAA Federal
Wed Jun 12 11:36:28 CDT 2013
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 5:10 AM, Nathaniel Smith <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Personally I think that overloading np.empty is horribly ugly, will
> continue confusing newbies and everyone else indefinitely, and I'm
> 100% convinced that we'll regret implementing such a warty interface
> for something that should be so idiomatic.
deprecate np.ma.filled in favor
> of masked_array.filled (which does exactly the same thing) and
> eventually switch np.ma.filled to be consistent with the new
> I also don't really see why an np.empty() constructor exists, it seems
> to do the same thing that np.ndarray() does.
I had always assumed that np.ndarray() was a "low-level" interce that
you really don't want to use in regular code (maybe for subclassing
array...), as the docs say:
Arrays should be constructed using `array`, `zeros` or `empty` (refer
to the See Also section below). The parameters given here refer to
a low-level method (`ndarray(...)`) for instantiating an array.
Am I wrong? is there any reason )other than history to have np.empty()
But in any case, I like np.filled(), as being analogous to ones(),
zeros() and empty()...
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