| 154 | 156 | As a regular user of MaskedArray, I became increasingly frustrated with the subclassing of masked arrays (even if I can only blame my inexperience). I needed to develop a class of arrays that could store some additional information along with numerical values, while keeping the possibility for missing data (picture storing a series of dates along with measurements). I started to implement such a class, but then quickly realized that any additional information disappeared when processing these subarrays (for example, adding a constant value to a subarray would erase its dates). I ended up writing the equivalent of {{{numpy.core.ma}}} for my particular class, ufuncs included. Everything went fine until I needed to subclass my new class, when more problems showed up: some attributes of the new subclass were lost during processing. I identified the culprit as MaskedArray, which returns masked ndarrays when I expected masked arrays of my class. I was preparing myself to rewrite numpy.core.ma when I forced myself to learn how to subclass ndarrays. As I became more familiar with the {{{__new__}}} and {{{__array_finalize__}}} methods, I started to wonder why masked arrays were objects, and not ndarrays, and whether it wouldn't be more convenient for subclassing if they did behave like regular ndarrays. |
