On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 4:04 AM Stephan Hoyer <sho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 12:29 PM Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> We seem to have run out of steam a bit here. >> > > We discussed this today in person at the NumPy sprint. > > The consensus was to go for a name like __skip_array_function__. Ufuncs > don't have very good use-cases for a function that skips dispatch: > 1. The overhead of the ufunc dispatch machinery is much smaller, > especially in the case where all arguments are NumPy arrays, because there > is no need for a wrapper function in Python. > 2. Inside __array_ufunc__ it's possible to cast arguments into NumPy > arrays explicitly and then call the ufunc again. There's no need to > explicitly skip overrides. > > We also don't really care about supporting the use-case where a function > gets changed into a ufunc. We already warn users not to call > __skip_array_function__ directly (without using getattr) outside > __array_function__. > > Given all this, it seems best to stick with a name that mirrors > __array_function__ as closely as possible. I picked "skip" instead of > "skpping" just because it's slightly shorter, but otherwise don't have a > strong preference. > > I've edited the NEP [1] and implementation [2] pull requests to use this > new name, and clarify the use-cases. If there no serious objections, I'd > love to merge these soon, in time for the NumPy 1.17 release candidate. > > [1] https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/13305 > [2] https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/13389 > Thanks for the update Stephan, that all sounds good to me. Looks like it was a productive sprint! Cheers, Ralf
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
