[Numpy-discussion] Allowing broadcasting of code dimensions in generalized ufuncs
shoyer at gmail.com
Fri Jun 1 18:45:39 EDT 2018
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 2:42 PM Marten van Kerkwijk <
m.h.vankerkwijk at gmail.com> wrote:
> Having done that, I felt the examples actually justified the frozen
> dimensions quite well. Given that you're the who expressed most doubts
> about them, could you have a look? Ideally, I'd avoid having to write a NEP
> for this, and the examples do seem to make it quite obvious that this
> change to the signature is the way to go, as its meaning is dead obvious.
> And the implementation is super-straightforward...
I do think it would be valuable to have a brief NEP on this, especially on
the solution for matmul. NEPs don't have to be long, and don't need to go
into the full detail of implementations. But they are a nice place to
summarize design discussions.
In fact, I would say the text you have below is nearly enough for one or
two NEPs. The parts that are missing would be valuable to add anyways:
- A brief discussion (a sentence or two) of potential broader use-cases for
optional dimensions (ufuncs that act on row/column vectors and matrices).
- A brief discussion of rejected alternatives (only a few sentences for
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion