On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Charles R Harris > <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > 2011/10/28 Stéfan van der Walt <ste...@sun.ac.za> > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Benjamin Root <ben.r...@ou.edu> wrote: > >> > The space issues was never ignored and Mark left room for that to be > >> > addressed. Parameterized dtypes can still be added (and isn't all > that > >> > different from multi-na). Perhaps I could be convinced of a having > np.MA > >> > assignments mean "ignore" and np.NA mean "absent". How far off are we > >> > really from consensus? > >> > >> Do you know whether Mark is around? I think his feedback would be > >> useful at this point; having written the code, he'll be able to > >> evaluate some of the technical suggestions made. > >> > > > > Yes, Mark is around, but I assume he is interested in his school work at > > this point. And he might not be inclined to get back into this particular > > discussion. I don't feel he was treated very well by some last time > around. > > We have not always been good at separating the concept of disagreement > from that of rudeness. > > As I've said before, one form of rudeness (and not disagreement) is > ignoring people. > > We should all be careful to point out - respectfully, and with reasons > - when we find our colleagues replies (or non-replies) to be rude, > because rudeness is very bad for the spirit of open discussion. > > Trying things out in preparation for discussion is also a mark of respect. Have you worked with the current implementation? Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
