[Numpy-discussion] Adding to the non-dispatched implementation of NumPy methods
shoyer at gmail.com
Sat Apr 27 23:50:18 EDT 2019
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 4:39 PM Hameer Abbasi <einstein.edison at gmail.com>
> On Saturday, Apr 27, 2019 at 6:21 PM, Stephan Hoyer <shoyer at gmail.com>
> Are there aspects of your uarray proposal that are relevant to the current
> proposed revisions to NEP 18? If so, please restate them :).
> Of course, here’s my proposal:
> We leave NEP-18 as-is for now, and instead of writing separate protocols
> for coercion, dtypes and ufuncs (which will be needed somewhere down the
> line), we have a discussion about uarray and see if it can help there. :-)
I don't want to add separate protocols for coercion, dtypes or ufuncs as
part of NEP-18. Whatever form these should take, they should definitely be
a separate proposals.
__array_function__ is not the end of the story about duck array support in
NumPy, but I think it's valuable incremental step, as evidenced by the
projects that are already eager to adopt it. I would really, really like to
try to get a usable and near-final version of it released in NumPy 1.17.
That doesn't leave us much time.
I've very interested in your work on uarray, but as far as I can tell, it
would not directly interact with NumPy's implementation of
__array_function__, so discussing it doesn't feel immediately urgent to me.
Rather, it's an alternative and possibly more complete solution for some of
the same problems. That's fantastic -- but please, let us finish
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion