On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 4:39 PM Hameer Abbasi <einstein.edi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, Apr 27, 2019 at 6:21 PM, Stephan Hoyer <sho...@gmail.com> > wrote: > 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 __array_function__ first.
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
