[Numpy-discussion] feedback request: proposal to add masks to the core ndarray

Matthew Brett matthew.brett@gmail....
Sat Jun 25 06:00:14 CDT 2011


On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Mark Wiebe <mwwiebe@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett@gmail.com>
>> @Mark - I don't have a clear idea whether you consider the nafloat64
>> option to be still in play as the first thing to be implemented
>> (before array.mask).   If it is, what kind of thing would persuade you
>> either way?
> I'm focusing all of my effort on getting my proposal of adding a mask to the
> core ndarray into a state where it satisfies everyone's requirements as best
> I can.

Maybe it would be worth setting out the requirements formally somewhere?

> I'm not precluding the possibility that someone could convince me
> that the na-dtype is good, but I gave it a good chunk of thought before
> starting to write the proposal. To persuade me towards the na-dtype option,
> I need to be convinced that I'm solving the problem class in a generic way
> that works orthogonally with other features, with manageable implementation
> requirements, a very usable result for both strong and weak programmers, and
> with good performance characteristics. I think the na-dtype approach isn't
> as generic as I would like, and the implementation seems like it would be
> trickier than the masked approach.

What I'm getting at, is that I think you have made the decision
between these two implementations some time ago while looking at the C
code.  Now of course you would be a much better person to make that
decision than - say - me.  It's just that, if you want coherent
feedback from us on this decision, we need to get some technical grasp
of why you made it.    I realize that it will not be easy to explain
in detail, but honestly, it could be a useful discussion to have from
your and our point of view, even if it ends up in the same place.

See you,


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list