issue_comments: 387580695

This data as json

html_url issue_url id node_id user created_at updated_at author_association body reactions performed_via_github_app issue
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/2104#issuecomment-387580695 https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/2104 387580695 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDM4NzU4MDY5NQ== 1217238 2018-05-09T00:12:14Z 2018-05-09T00:12:14Z MEMBER

should we support the interpolation along the non-dimensional coordinate?

As I think I've mentioned before, I think we should save interpolation of unstructured grids for later -- if only to keep the complexity of this PR to the minimum.

Interpolation on unstructured grids needs some of auxiliary data structure to be done efficiently, so it might make sense to wait until after we support flexible index types such as a KDTree index saved on xarray objects. That said, we could also add it now (immediately after this PR), and add support for caching KDTrees later.

I think the API for unstructured grid interpolation is pretty straightforward and could even reuse the same interp/interpolate_at method. Unstructured grid interpolation would be triggered whenever multiple existing coordinates that share some of the same dimensions are interpolated.

what should be the default value of 'bounds_error' and fill_value. scipy's interpolator assumes bounds_error=True by default, but I think bounds_error=False is more xarray-like, but it may be unintuitive for users very familiar with scipy's behavior.

I agree, by default we should switch to bounds_error=False, and replace extrapolated values with NaN, which is already the default fill value for interp1d.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
   320275317