On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 4:16 PM Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:

Vendoring means "include the code". So no dependency on an external

On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 11:04 PM Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@gmail.com> wrote: package. If we don't vendor, it's going to be either unused, or end up as a dependency for the whole SciPy/PyData stack.

If we vendor it then it also ends up as a dependency for the whole SciPy/PyData stack...

It seems you're just using an unusual definition here. Dependency == a package you have to install, is present in pyproject.toml/install_requires, shows up in https://github.com/numpy/numpy/network/dependencies, etc.

Actually, now that we've discussed the fft issue, I'd suggest to change the NEP to: vendor, and make default for fft, random, and linalg.

There's no way we can have an effective discussion of duck arrays, fft backends, random backends, and linalg backends all at once in a single thread.

Can you write separate NEPs for each of these? Some questions I'd like to see addressed:

For fft: - fft is an entirely self-contained operation, with no interactions with the rest of the system; the only difference between implementations is speed. What problems are caused by monkeypatching,

It was already explained in this thread, it's been on our roadmap for ~2 years at least, and monkeypatching is pretty much universally understood to be bad. If that's not enough, please search the NumPy issues for "monkeypatching". You'll find issues like https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/12374#issuecomment-438725645. At the moment this is very confusing, and hard to diagnose - you have to install a whole new NumPy and then find that the problem is gone (or not). Being able to switch backends in one line of code and re-test would be very valuable. It seems perhaps more useful to have a call so we can communicate with higher bandwidth, rather than lots of writing new NEPs here? In preparation, we need to write up in more detail how __array_function__ and unumpy fit together, rather than treat different pieces all separately (because the problems and pros/cons really won't change much between functions and submodules). I'll defer answering your other questions till that's done, so the discussion is hopefully a bit more structured. Cheers, Ralf and how is uarray materially different from monkeypatching?

For random: - I thought the new random implementation with pluggable generators etc. was supposed to solve this problem already. Why doesn't it? - The biggest issue with MKL monkeypatching random is that it breaks stream stability. How does the uarray approach address this?

For linalg: - linalg already support __array_ufunc__ for overrides. Why do we need a second override system? Isn't that redundant?

-n

-- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion