Will do. Thanks for looking into this! From: NumPy-Discussion <numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org<mailto:numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org>> on behalf of Charles R Harris <charlesr.har...@gmail.com<mailto:charlesr.har...@gmail.com>> Reply-To: Discussion of Numerical Python <numpy-discussion@scipy.org<mailto:numpy-discussion@scipy.org>> Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 10:35 AM To: Discussion of Numerical Python <numpy-discussion@scipy.org<mailto:numpy-discussion@scipy.org>> Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] Inconsistent behavior for ufuncs in numpy v1.10.X
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Solbrig,Jeremy <jeremy.solb...@colostate.edu<mailto:jeremy.solb...@colostate.edu>> wrote: Hello Chuck, I receive the same result with 1.10.4. I agree that it looks like __array_prepare__, __array_finalize__, and __array_wrap__ have not been changed. I’m starting to dig into the source again, but focusing on the _MaskedBinaryOperation class to try to understand what is going on there. Jeremy From: NumPy-Discussion <numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org<mailto:numpy-discussion-boun...@scipy.org>> on behalf of Charles R Harris <charlesr.har...@gmail.com<mailto:charlesr.har...@gmail.com>> Reply-To: Discussion of Numerical Python <numpy-discussion@scipy.org<mailto:numpy-discussion@scipy.org>> Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 10:17 AM To: Discussion of Numerical Python <numpy-discussion@scipy.org<mailto:numpy-discussion@scipy.org>> Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] Inconsistent behavior for ufuncs in numpy v1.10.X On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.har...@gmail.com<mailto:charlesr.har...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:43 PM, Solbrig,Jeremy <jeremy.solb...@colostate.edu<mailto:jeremy.solb...@colostate.edu>> wrote: Hello, <http://stackoverflow.com/questions/35005569/behavior-of-ufuncs-and-mathematical-operators-differ-for-subclassed-maskedarray> Much of what is below was copied from this stack overflow question. I am attempting to subclass numpy.ma.MaskedArray. I am currently using Python v2.7.10. The problem discussed below does not occur in Numpy v1.9.2, but does occur in all versions of Numpy v1.10.x. In all versions of Numpy v1.10.x, using mathematical operators on my subclass behaves differently than using the analogous ufunc. When using the ufunc directly (e.g. np.subtract(arr1, arr2)), __array_prepare__, __array_finalize__, and __array_wrap__ are all called as expected, however, when using the symbolic operator (e.g. arr1-arr2) only __array_finalize__ is called. As a consequence, I lose any information stored in arr._optinfo when a mathematical operator is used. Here is a code snippet that illustrates the issue. #!/bin/env pythonimport numpy as np from numpy.ma import MaskedArray, nomask class InfoArray(MaskedArray): def __new__(cls, info=None, data=None, mask=nomask, dtype=None, copy=False, subok=True, ndmin=0, fill_value=None, keep_mask=True, hard_mask=None, shrink=True, **kwargs): obj = super(InfoArray, cls).__new__(cls, data=data, mask=mask, dtype=dtype, copy=copy, subok=subok, ndmin=ndmin, fill_value=fill_value, hard_mask=hard_mask, shrink=shrink, **kwargs) obj._optinfo['info'] = info return obj def __array_prepare__(self, out, context=None): print '__array_prepare__' return super(InfoArray, self).__array_prepare__(out, context) def __array_wrap__(self, out, context=None): print '__array_wrap__' return super(InfoArray, self).__array_wrap__(out, context) def __array_finalize__(self, obj): print '__array_finalize__' return super(InfoArray, self).__array_finalize__(obj)if __name__ == "__main__": arr1 = InfoArray('test', data=[1,2,3,4,5,6]) arr2 = InfoArray(data=[0,1,2,3,4,5]) diff1 = np.subtract(arr1, arr2) print diff1._optinfo diff2 = arr1-arr2 print diff2._optinfo If run, the output looks like this: $ python test_ma_sub.py #Call to np.subtract(arr1, arr2) here __array_finalize__ __array_finalize__ __array_prepare__ __array_finalize__ __array_wrap__ __array_finalize__ {'info': 'test'}#Executing arr1-arr2 here __array_finalize__ {} Currently I have simply downgraded to 1.9.2 to solve the problem for myself, but have been having difficulty figuring out where the difference lies between 1.9.2 and 1.10.0. I don't see a difference between 1.9.2 and 1.10.0 in this test, so I suspect it is something else. Could you try 1.10.4 to see if the something else has been fixed? Which is to say, it isn't in the calls to prepare, wrap, and finalize. Now to look in _optinfo. Please open an issue on github, the mailing list is not a good place to deal with this. I've got a bisect script running, so we should soon know where the change occurred. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
