Curzio Basso schrieb:
Well try it out and see for yourself ;-)
good point :-)
But for sums it doesn't make a difference, right... Note that it's
called nan*sum* and not nanwhatever.
sure, I was still thinking about the first post which was referring to
the average...
qrz
Right,
Alan G Isaac wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, Sven Schreiber apparently wrote:
So maybe that's a feature request, complementing the
nansum function by a nanaverage?
This is not an objection; just an observation.
It has always seemed to me that such descriptive
statistics make more sense as
Could someone recommend a way to average an array along the columns
without propagating the nans and without turning them into some weird
number which bias the result? I guess I can just keep using an
indexing array for fooArray, but if there is somehting more graceful,
I would love to know.
Boy
Webb Sprague wrote:
Could someone recommend a way to average an array along the columns
without propagating the nans and without turning them into some weird
number which bias the result? I guess I can just keep using an
indexing array for fooArray, but if there is somehting more graceful,
I
