Hey, Greg, I went through the ideas you have mentioned and also looked up the matplotlib docs as suggested. And I feel like creating a new namespace would be a better option as it won't require many changes in the current implementation. As matplotlib.pyplot is a well-implemented module I feel like we can consider it as our basic structure and start implementing the backend. For the start, I think import can look like this(rough idea) import scipy.fftpack.pyfftw as fft where pyffw can be replaced by any third party fftpack. Cheers. -Gopi On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 2:00 AM Gopi Manohar Tatiraju <deathcoderx@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey, I feel like I need to make some more changes regarding the idea. I went through your reply to Anany and I will consider all those points and will get back to you once I come up with something.
-Gopi.
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 5:24 AM Gregory Lee <grlee77@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Gopi,
I am not sure I follow exactly what you are suggesting here. Are you proposing that the `fftpackN` variable in your example would be a Python module corresponding to a given backend? If so, why is an array of data, z, being passed into the newAPI function here? I don't see why a data array should be needed at all to choose a backend.
Please also see my response to Anany's recent post on this list for a couple of other suggestions of things to consider in terms of the API.
- Greg
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 5:27 AM Gopi Manohar Tatiraju < deathcoderx@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey, I went through the code and got some ideas. So what will happen is: First, we will declare FFTW as we use them normally.
z = np.random.rand(2, 128, 64) pyfftw.FFTW(z, axes=(-1, )) .. .. Now after declaring our basic work to shift to another FFTpack, what we can do is: fftPackN= newAPI(z, pack = 'PYFFTW');
Pack will take the name of the 3rd party FFT pack which we want to use. Suggestions needed.
Cheers.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 8:43 PM Eric Larson <larson.eric.d@gmail.com> wrote:
After reading the related issues and thinking about the problem, perhaps the best first step is you come up with some initial API proposal.
One way to work through the process is to think about the use cases that we want to support. How should users actually write code to use the new functionality? You can start with short code snippets that do not work currently, but should work for users at the end of the project. Then think about what needs to change inside SciPy for these code snippets to work. This can become an iterative process as you realize that the SciPy changes might be better or easier with changes to the user-facing API, etc.
Eric
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 3:38 PM Gopi Manohar Tatiraju < deathcoderx@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey, As proposal submission period started I want to discuss a bit anobt how can we implement the API. I would very much appriciate inputs and guidance.
Cheers.
On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 11:40 PM Eric Larson <larson.eric.d@gmail.com> wrote:
The best way to figure that out is probably to take a look at some of the existing (minor) SciPy GitHub issues and try to work on one or two that you feel like working on. Actually trying to work out how to contribute code changes (as independently as possible/reasonable based on the existing guides/docs already discoverable online) will quickly highlight things that need to be learned. Some of the general things are the SciPy contributing guidelines, standard GitHub PR workflow, communication with reviewers, and so forth.
For this particular project, it's important to understand the various flavors and properties of FFT in SciPy (real, complex, n-dimensional, caching plans, etc.) as well as other projects like NumPy, CuPy, and pyFFTW. Some of this can be learned and improved upon as part of GSoC, but the more you know and can demonstrate / put into practice knowledge of before the applications are reviewed, the better.
Eric
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 4:55 AM Gopi Manohar Tatiraju < deathcoderx@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for the detailed reply. > I will keep these point in mind while preparing my proposal. Apart > from proposal, what skills shall I improve so that I can contribute more > effectively and efficiently. > > Cheers. > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2019, 3:42 AM Eric Larson <larson.eric.d@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> There are a number of considerations that would be good to address. >> I'd start by considering the things that are typically considered >> when making changes to SciPy >> <https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/hacking.html#contributing-to-scip...>, >> but I'd expand it to a longer list since the scope is bigger than a typical >> single PR. The list would contain (at least): >> >> - what will the user-facing API / contract be? >> - what in SciPy needs to change to allow it (internals / >> implementation outline, perhaps skeleton functions/classes)? >> - what examples should we show users (in general this ends up being >> just simple use cases of the API)? >> - how will we test it for correctness? >> - how will we benchmark it to prevent performance regressions? >> - how can we break up the work for these steps (if possible) into >> separable, sequential (or -- better but not usually possible -- >> independent) PRs? >> >> You might notice that none of these points are actually all that >> specific to the FFT project, but can be generally applicable to GSoC >> projects. For the FFT project, I would say "how do we build the backend" is >> indeed implicitly contained / outlined in these bullet points. And as with >> most projects, the first two points (and possibly the last) will probably >> be the most challenging to sort out. >> >> Eric >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 10:09 PM Gopi Manohar Tatiraju < >> deathcoderx@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hey Eric, >>> So for my proposal, shall I include how can we built a back end? >>> What all points shall I include to make it effective? >>> >>> Cheers. >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019, 4:50 AM Eric Larson <larson.eric.d@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> That would be me -- don't worry, I'm on this list, as are >>>> (presumably) other developers interested in the discussion, so no need to >>>> document elsewhere for now from our end. It looks like Greg has summarized >>>> the current status and thoughts we've had, so I don't have much to add at >>>> this point. >>>> >>>> Eric >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2019 at 11:59 PM Gopi Manohar Tatiraju < >>>> deathcoderx@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hey Greg, >>>>> I got the basic idea about what we want to implement this year. >>>>> Our first priority is to create a backend for 3rd party >>>>> fftpacks. We can create API using Python and Flask or any other suitable >>>>> framework. >>>>> >>>>> I thought this discussion was going on on SciPy Developer List >>>>> only. So do I need to document it all and post it somewhere so that other >>>>> contributors can see this? >>>>> Also, I couldn't find any contact info regarding Eric. It would >>>>> be very helpful if we include him in this discussion as this is a roadmap >>>>> for GSoC project and I can also get more insight into the project and >>>>> expected outcomes. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 9:31 AM Gregory Lee <grlee77@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2019 at 12:28 PM Gopi Manohar Tatiraju < >>>>>> deathcoderx@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hey Gregory, >>>>>>> I went through the idea and I am very much interested in >>>>>>> working on it. I had Fourier Transforms as a part of my academic course, so >>>>>>> I am well aware with basic concepts. >>>>>>> One thing I want to discuss is, its mentioned that we have to >>>>>>> create a backend system for 3rd party FFTpacks so my dobuts >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. How are we going to create API? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This will needed to be decided on in consensus with the SciPy >>>>>> developers and user community. I am mentoring for the project as a >>>>>> contributor here and a maintainer of the related pyFFTW package, but I am >>>>>> not a core SciPy dev (the other mentor, Eric, is a core dev here). I have >>>>>> not discussed the API in any detail with the SciPy team at this stage. >>>>>> Working out details of what the API should look like and working to >>>>>> finalize that in collaboration with the community will be a primary task >>>>>> during the early part of the GSOC project. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. After the creation of backend will user at the time of >>>>>>> installation of SciPy will decide what all 3rd party FFTpacks he needs or >>>>>>> we will include some by default? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The idea is to allow users to opt-in to a different FFT >>>>>> backend at run time, but these alternative libraries will not be >>>>>> distributed with SciPy itself due to incompatible software licenses (pyFFTW >>>>>> and mkl-fft) or a requirement for specific hardware (CuPy requires an >>>>>> NVIDIA GPU). SciPy will continue to offer its own bundled FFT library >>>>>> (currently fftpack, but this could be switched to pocketfft as discussed in >>>>>> the ideas page). The purpose of the backend interface is to provide a >>>>>> convenient way for users to have third party libraries perform the FFTs >>>>>> instead, but under the existing scipy.fftpack API. This is motivated by a >>>>>> desire by end users and downstream projects to have features such as >>>>>> multi-threading (pyFFTW and mkl-fft) or GPU support (CuPy) that are not >>>>>> implemented in scipy.fftpack. Ultimately it will be up to users that opt-in >>>>>> to using these other libraries to confirm that the license terms and are >>>>>> compatible with their use case. >>>>>> >>>>>> p.s. It is not a big deal, but I think the SciPy-Dev mailing >>>>>> lists prefers replies **below** the email you are replying to so people can >>>>>> more easily follow the thread of discussion. There are some guidelines at: >>>>>> https://www.scipy.org/scipylib/mailing-lists.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I will research more about how to implement a backend myself >>>>>>> and will let you know as soon as I come up with something new. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> CHeers, >>>>>>> Greg >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2019 at 10:25 PM Gregory Lee <grlee77@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2019 at 4:19 AM Gopi Manohar Tatiraju < >>>>>>>> deathcoderx@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I want to work on SciPy in GSoC 2019. I started fixing some >>>>>>>>> bugs, also made some pull request. Can anyone suggest me how should I >>>>>>>>> proceed further? >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> SciPy-Dev mailing list >>>>>>>>> SciPy-Dev@python.org >>>>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Gopi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think you have probably already found it, but the GSOC >>>>>>>> project we have already identified mentors for in SciPy is here: >>>>>>>> https://github.com/scipy/scipy/wiki/GSoC-2019-project-ideas >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If this is a project you are interested in then I would start >>>>>>>> thinking about what the FFT interface would look like and reviewing some of >>>>>>>> the past/present issues related to fftpack / FFT in SciPy. Please ask >>>>>>>> questions you have related to that project here so that you can clarify >>>>>>>> what would be involved in writing a successful application. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you have a different idea in mind you can propose it here, >>>>>>>> but you should do that soon, because it will be necessary to determine if >>>>>>>> there is interest from the SciPy team before you spend time coming up with >>>>>>>> a detailed proposal. We have to determine if a project sounds feasible to >>>>>>>> complete for GSOC and if appropriate mentors can be identified. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ultimately, you will need to submit an application to SciPy >>>>>>>> between March 25th - April 9th. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Greg >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> SciPy-Dev mailing list >>>>>>>> SciPy-Dev@python.org >>>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> SciPy-Dev mailing list >>>>>>> SciPy-Dev@python.org >>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> SciPy-Dev mailing list >>>>>> SciPy-Dev@python.org >>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> SciPy-Dev mailing list >>>>> SciPy-Dev@python.org >>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> SciPy-Dev mailing list >>>> SciPy-Dev@python.org >>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SciPy-Dev mailing list >>> SciPy-Dev@python.org >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> SciPy-Dev mailing list >> SciPy-Dev@python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > SciPy-Dev mailing list > SciPy-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev > _______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
_______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
_______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
_______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
_______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev