[Numpy-discussion] broadcasting for randint

[G Young]

Hello all,

Thank you to those who commented on this PR and for pushing it to a *much
better place* in terms of templating with Tempita.  With that issue out of
the way it seems, the momentum has stalled a bit.  However, it would be
great to receive any additional feedback, *especially from maintainers* so
as to help get this merged!  Thanks!

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 1:23 PM, G Young <gfyoung17 at gmail.com> wrote:

> There seems to be a push in my PR now for using Tempita as a way to solve
> this issue with the ad-hoc templating.  However, before I go about
> attempting this, it would be great to receive feedback from other
> developers on this, especially from some of the numpy maintainers.  Thanks!
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 3:04 AM, G Young <gfyoung17 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Just wanted to ping the mailing list again in case this email (see below)
>> got lost in your inboxes.  Would be great to get some feedback on this!
>> Thanks!
>>
>> On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 2:15 AM, G Young <gfyoung17 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have had a PR <https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/6938> open for
>>> quite some time now that allows arguments to broadcast in *randint*.
>>> While the functionality is fully in-place and very robust, the obstacle at
>>> this point is the implementation.
>>>
>>> When the *dtype* parameter was added to *randint* (see here
>>> <https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/6910>), a big issue with the
>>> implementation was that it created so much duplicate code that it would be
>>> a huge maintenance nightmare.  However, this was dismissed in the original
>>> PR message because it was believed that template-ing would be trivial,
>>> which seemed reasonable at the time.
>>>
>>> When I added broadcasting, I introduced a template system to the code
>>> that dramatically cut down on the duplication.  However, the obstacle has
>>> been whether or not this template system is too *ad hoc* to be merged
>>> into the library.  Implementing a template in Cython was not considered
>>> sufficient and is in fact very tricky to do, and unfortunately, I have not
>>> received any constructive suggestions from maintainers about how to
>>> proceed, so I'm opening this up to the mailing to see whether or not there
>>> are better alternatives to what I did, whether this should be merged as it,
>>> or whether this should be tabled until a better template can be found.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20160617/99e548e9/attachment.html>