[Numpy-discussion] Proposal: add `force=` or `copy=` kwarg to `__array__` interface
sebastian at sipsolutions.net
Fri Apr 24 09:26:32 EDT 2020
On Fri, 2020-04-24 at 11:34 +0100, Eric Wieser wrote:
> Perhaps worth mentioning that we've discussed this sort of API
> before, in
> Under that proposal, the api would be something like:
> * `copy=True` - always copy, like it is today
> * `copy=False` - copy if needed, like it is today
> * `copy=np.never_copy` - never copy, throw an exception if not
> I think the discussion stalled on the precise spelling of the third
> `__array__` was not discussed there, but it seems like adding the
> argument to `__array__` would be a perfectly reasonable extension.
One thing to note is that `__array__` is actually asked to return a
copy AFAIK. I doubt it always does, but if it does not I assume the
object should and could provide `__array_interface__`.
Under that assumption, it would be an opt-out right now since NumPy
allows copies by default here.
Defining things along copy does seem sensible, though I do not know how
it would play with some of the current array-likes choosing to refuse
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 03:00, Juan Nunez-Iglesias <jni at fastmail.com>
> > Hi everyone,
> > One bit of expressivity we would miss is “copy if necessary, but
> > otherwise
> > > don’t bother”, but there are workarounds to this.
> > >
> > After a side discussion with Stéfan van der Walt, we came up with
> > `allow_copy=True`, which would express to the downstream library
> > that we
> > don’t mind waiting, but that zero-copy would also be ok.
> > This sounds like the sort of thing that is use case driven. If
> > enough
> > projects want to use it, then I have no objections to adding the
> > keyword.
> > OTOH, we need to be careful about adding too many interoperability
> > tricks
> > as they complicate the code and makes it hard for folks to
> > determine the
> > best solution. Interoperability is a hot topic and we need to be
> > careful
> > not put too leave behind too many experiments in the NumPy
> > code. Do you
> > have any other ideas of how to achieve the same effect?
> > Personally, I don’t have any other ideas, but would be happy to
> > hear some!
> > My view regarding API/experiment creep is that `__array__` is the
> > oldest
> > and most basic of all the interop tricks and that this can be
> > safely
> > maintained for future generations. Currently it only takes `dtype=`
> > as a
> > keyword argument, so it is a very lean API. I think this particular
> > use
> > case is very natural and I’ve encountered the reluctance to
> > implicitly copy
> > twice, so I expect it is reasonably common.
> > Regarding difficulty in determining the best solution, I would be
> > happy to
> > contribute to the dispatch basics guide together with the new
> > kwarg. I
> > agree that the protocols are getting quite numerous and I couldn’t
> > find a
> > single place that gathers all the best practices together. But, to
> > reiterate my point: `__array__` is the simplest of these and I
> > think this
> > keyword is pretty safe to add.
> > For ease of discussion, here are the API options discussed so far,
> > as well
> > as a few extra that I don’t like but might trigger other ideas:
> > np.asarray(my_duck_array, allow_copy=True) # default is False, or
> > None ->
> > leave it to the duck array to decide
> > np.asarray(my_duck_array, copy=True) # always copies, but, if
> > supported
> > by the duck array, defers to it for the copy
> > np.asarray(my_duck_array, copy=‘allow’) # could take values
> > ‘allow’,
> > ‘force’, ’no’, True(=‘force’), False(=’no’)
> > np.asarray(my_duck_array, force_copy=False, allow_copy=True) #
> > separate
> > concepts, but unclear what force_copy=True, allow_copy=False means!
> > np.asarray(my_duck_array, force=True)
> > Juan.
> > _______________________________________________
> > NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> > NumPy-Discussion at python.org
> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at python.org
More information about the NumPy-Discussion