On 05/24/2018 11:31 AM, Sebastian Berg wrote: > I also somewhat like the idea of taking it out (once we have a first > replacement) in the case that we have a plan to do a better/lower level > replacement at a later point within numpy. > Removal generally has its merits, but if a (mid term) replacement will > come in any case, it would be nice to get those started first if > possible. > Otherwise downstream might end up having to fix up things twice. > > - Sebastian
Yes, I think the way forward is to start working on a new masked array while keeping the old one in place. Once it has progressed a little and we can step back and look at it, we can consider how to switch over. I imagine we would have both present in numpy under different names for a while. Also, I think it would be nice to work on it soon because it is a chance for us to eat our own dogfood in the __array_ufunc__ interface, which is not yet set in stone so we can fix any problems we discover with it. Allan _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
