Pierre GM wrote: > On Jan 24, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Ryan May wrote: >> Ok, thanks. I've dug a little further, and it seems like the >> problem is that a >> column of all missing values ends up as a column of all None's. >> When you create >> a (masked) array from a list of None's, you end up with an object >> array. On one >> hand I'd love for things to behave differently in this case, but on >> the other I >> understand why things work this way. > > Ryan, > Mind giving r6434 a try? As usual, don't hesitate to report any problem.
Works great! Thanks for the quick fix. I had racked my brain on how to go about fixing this cleanly, but this is far simpler than what I would have done. It makes sense, since all I really needed for the masked column was something *other* than object. Thanks a lot, Ryan -- Ryan May Graduate Research Assistant School of Meteorology University of Oklahoma _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
