Eric Firing wrote:
> Ryan May wrote:
>
>> Eric Firing wrote:
>>
>>> Ryan May wrote:
>>>
Hi,
In looking over trying to support masked arrays in wind barbs, I noticed
a problem. I had originally copied the model of quiver, wherein masked
arrays are supported f
Eric Firing wrote:
>>> Quiver and windbarb could use the axes.delete_masked_points function
>>> right at the start, and this might be a good change to make, except
>>> that it is inconsistent with using the present set_UVC method to
>>> update arrows at constant locations.
>>
>> delete_masked_
Ryan May wrote:
> Eric Firing wrote:
>> Ryan May wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> In looking over trying to support masked arrays in wind barbs, I noticed
>>> a problem. I had originally copied the model of quiver, wherein masked
>>> arrays are supported for U,V, and color, but not for X,Y. This stems
>>>
Eric Firing wrote:
> Ryan May wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> In looking over trying to support masked arrays in wind barbs, I noticed
>> a problem. I had originally copied the model of quiver, wherein masked
>> arrays are supported for U,V, and color, but not for X,Y. This stems
>> from the seemingly nonsen
Ryan May wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In looking over trying to support masked arrays in wind barbs, I noticed
> a problem. I had originally copied the model of quiver, wherein masked
> arrays are supported for U,V, and color, but not for X,Y. This stems
> from the seemingly nonsensical nature of masking a
Hi,
In looking over trying to support masked arrays in wind barbs, I noticed
a problem. I had originally copied the model of quiver, wherein masked
arrays are supported for U,V, and color, but not for X,Y. This stems
from the seemingly nonsensical nature of masking a location. However,
if noth
