On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 19:38, Pierre GM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 19 June 2008 20:28:46 Robert Kern wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 19:15, Pierre GM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Your question raises a good point: is there any consensus on using
>> > __all__ instead of the modul
On Thursday 19 June 2008 20:28:46 Robert Kern wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 19:15, Pierre GM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Your question raises a good point: is there any consensus on using
> > __all__ instead of the module namespace ?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean. Can you clarify?
__all__
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 19:15, Pierre GM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your question raises a good point: is there any consensus on using __all__
> instead of the module namespace ?
I'm not sure what you mean. Can you clarify?
--
Robert Kern
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an en
Reggie,
Good to hear from you.
There are no particular reason why maximum/minimum/default_fill_value
functions should stay in limbo, I'll put them in __all__. I'll also try to
implement the accumulate/reduceat functions for maximum/minimum, using the
work you've done on _extrema_functions.
You
This is just a minor question/problem with the new numpy.ma in version
1.1.0.
Because maximum and minimum in ma lack an accumulate attribute, I've
duplicated the functionality using the
maximum_fill_value/minimum_fill_value functions and doing something
like:
np.ma.masked_array(np.maximum.accumul
