BUG: Do not use getdata() in np.ma.masked_invalid#22839
Merged
charris merged 1 commit intonumpy:maintenance/1.24.xfrom Dec 20, 2022
Merged
BUG: Do not use getdata() in np.ma.masked_invalid#22839charris merged 1 commit intonumpy:maintenance/1.24.xfrom
charris merged 1 commit intonumpy:maintenance/1.24.xfrom
Conversation
This is the minimal solution to fix numpygh-22826 with as little change as possible. We should fix `getdata()` but I don't want to do that in a bug-fix release really. IMO the alternative is to revert numpygh-22046 which would also revert the behavior noticed in numpygh-22720 (which seems less harmful though). Closes numpygh-22826
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Backport of #22838.
This is the minimal solution to fix gh-22826 with as little change as possible.
We should fix
getdata()but I don't want to do that in a bug-fix release really.IMO the alternative is to revert gh-22046 which would also revert the behavior noticed in gh-22720 (which seems less harmful though).
Closes gh-22826