This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 13, 2021. It is now read-only.
Custom Masking value #389
Merged
Custom Masking value #389
Conversation
This file contains 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
cjermain
commented
Feb 18, 2020
wenbingl
approved these changes
Feb 18, 2020
wenbingl
suggested changes
Feb 18, 2020
wenbingl
approved these changes
Feb 19, 2020
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR uses the actual
mask_value, instead of assuming that it is0.0. This allows custom mask values to be used, as long as they can be represented as a float32 or int32 (e.g.np.nanworks as expected).I added
mask_valueto theOperatorclass to be able to pass that information down. I'm not convinced this is the best form, but it seemed to be the easiest way in the short term.