[Numpy-discussion] feedback request: proposal to add masks to the core ndarray
Fri Jun 24 12:57:14 CDT 2011
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Matthew Brett <firstname.lastname@example.org>wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Robert Kern <email@example.com>
> > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 09:33, Charles R Harris
> > <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Robert Kern <email@example.com>
> >>> The alternative proposal would be to add a few new dtypes that are
> >>> NA-aware. E.g. an nafloat64 would reserve a particular NaN value
> >>> (there are lots of different NaN bit patterns, we'd just reserve one)
> >>> that would represent NA. An naint32 would probably reserve the most
> >>> negative int32 value (like R does). Using the NA-aware dtypes signals
> >>> that you are using NA values; there is no need for an additional flag.
> >> Definitely better names than r-int32. Going this way has the advantage
> >> reducing the friction between R and numpy, and since R has pretty much
> >> become the standard software for statistics that is an important
> >> consideration.
> > I would definitely steal their choices of NA value for naint32 and
> > nafloat64. I have reservations about their string NA value (i.e. 'NA')
> > as anyone doing business in North America and other continents may
> > have issues with that....
> It would certainly help me at least if someone (Mark? sorry to
> ask...) could set out the implementation and API differences that
> would result from the two options:
> 1) array.mask option - an integer array of shape array.shape giving
> mask (True, False) values for each element
> 2) nafloat64 option - dtypes with specified dtype-specific missing values
That's something that should go in the NEP, I'll email when I update it.
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion