On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 9:12 AM Tyler Reddy <tyler.je.re...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For NEP 47/array API standard, do we have a sense for how far off > numpy.array_api is from passing a tagged version of the conformance test > suite? > The test suite for 2021.12 effectively passes everywhere, except for a few very small things which are either too hard or not worth wrapping around (the most notable of these is that np.array_api.asarray(copy=False) raises NotImplementedError because we are waiting for np.asarray() to implement it). Work hasn't happened yet to update it to the 2022.12 version of the standard that was recently tagged. That will mainly involve adding complex numbers. Of course, that's just numpy.array_api. numpy itself has many more failures. The most impactful of those were discussed at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/numpy-discussion@python.org/thread/TTZEUKXUICDHGTCX5EMR6DQTYOSDGRV7/#YKBWQ2AP76WYWAP6GFRYMPHZCKTC43KM . This is all likely to turn into a NEP at some point. Can you do something like "import numpy.array_api as np" and then "export > ARRAY_API_TESTS_MODULE=numpy"? > You just use ARRAY_API_TESTS_MODULE=numpy.array_api > Probably not exactly that, but you likely know what I mean. I'm guessing > someone has already checked this, but maybe posting a short summary of the > current test suite result on the project board item would be nice. > Incidentally, is there a short summary of how well the other major libs are > doing with this suite somewhere? > There are plans to work on an array API reporting site, which would allow different libraries to upload a report of compliance to a central site, which would produce something similar to the "HTML browser compliance" site you may have seen. Aaron Meurer > Would you turn that test suite on in a subset of the CI to enforce > conformance moving forward when the time is right? > > On Sun, 15 Jan 2023 at 05:46, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 1:59 PM Sebastian Berg < >> sebast...@sipsolutions.net> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> as brought up many times, I would like to aim for a NumPy 2.0. The >>> current hope would be to release within the year and start adding small >>> breaking changes soon, but hidden behind feature flags. Similar to what is >>> already the case for NEP 50 >>> <https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0050-scalar-promotion.html> with `export >>> NPY_PROMOTION_STATE=weak`. >>> >>> Below, is a draft version for a NEP, I have also created the >>> corresponding project board on github. >>> Clearly, especially specific changes will need more discussion, but >>> there are some clearer bigger ones as well as small changes that are >>> breaking but should be easy to adapt for. >>> >>> Thanks to Inessa and Ralf who helped draft and revise this! >>> >> >> Thanks for drafting this proposal and leading this effort Sebastian! >> >> It seems like no one wants to be the first to reply here, so I'll try to >> get us started:) My opinion has always been that NumPy 2.0 should be a >> "major" thing, and either reserved for a needed ABI break or if we'd have >> other compelling features or needs. It looks to me like we have now reached >> that point. In particular, Sebastian as the main developer of new dtype and >> ufunc internals features, seems to have reached the point where the need >> for backwards compatibility in the C API is imposing too much of a burden. >> Making that work easier is enough of a reason for me to be +1 on a NumPy >> 2.0. After so many years, saying that it's fine to have a breaking release >> to clean things up is very likely a good thing long term. >> >> With that need established, other important improvements that are already >> in the pipeline and best done in a 2.0 release, like enabling NEP 50 and >> Python API improvements, make the overall picture a compelling one. >> >> I also like the proposed logistics: any major change needs to land on a >> roadmap for 2.0, and for that it needs to have two champions who commit to >> getting it done. Not breaking our regular 6-monthly releases schedules >> looks like a good plan. Having a feature flag for the 1.25.0 release (June) >> and then making breaking changes the default in the July-December period >> seems very reasonable. >> >> Cheers, >> Ralf >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> Road to NumPy 2.0 >>> >>> *Note:* This is a living document. We are prepared to modify it through >>> continued dialogue with the community. Its acceptance indicates consensus >>> on the process and timelines. >>> >>> >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_Abstract> >>> Abstract >>> NumPy 2.0 release is an opportunity to make some complex changes for >>> which a normal deprecation wouldn’t be viable as the user impact may be >>> larger than is normally considered acceptable for a minor release. Yet, >>> NumPy 2.0 is *not* meant to be a large breaking release. Most users >>> should not need to worry about introduced changes. >>> This document contains essential information about the work on NumPy 2.0 >>> release. >>> >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_Motivation-and-impact>Motivation >>> and impact >>> NumPy 2.0 release is required for fixing old bugs and modernizing >>> NumPy’s code base. It is not planned to be a “break the world release”. >>> This means: >>> >>> - It must be possible to compile downstream packages to be >>> compatible with both new and old NumPy versions. However, the C-API is >>> expected to be broken. The path to achieve this compatibility will be >>> defined as a *high priority* project. >>> - The *majority* of users should not require code updates or such >>> updates should be very easy to do. Expert users are likely to notice >>> changes though. >>> - We accept that some NumPy users may not able to adopt NumPy 2.0 >>> immediately or may have to wait until following releases for adoption. >>> >>> One should keep in mind that even bug fixes can break the code of a >>> small number of users. >>> >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_Timeline> >>> Timeline >>> NumPy 2.0 will be scheduled for release in Jan 2024. Projects and >>> changes should be proposed as soon as possible. We propose a NumPy team >>> meeting around April 2023 (details to be discussed) in order to finalize >>> high-impact projects and review all candidate projects. >>> Projects not proposed by this time may not be prioritized for a final >>> 2.0 release. >>> Changes which can be implemented using a feature-flag are strongly >>> encouraged as it simplifies keeping projects moving. >>> >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_Project-selection-process>Project >>> selection process >>> To determine the scope of work for NumPy 2.0 release, we suggest >>> introducing three categories of projects/proposals: >>> >>> 1. *high*: proposal requires high visibility or may be critical for >>> the NumPy 2.0 release, >>> 2. *normal*, >>> 3. *candidate*: changes which are in an early planning stage. >>> >>> High priority proposals will be listed explicitly in this NEP. >>> A project board <https://github.com/orgs/numpy/projects/9> will track >>> all projects proposed for NumPy 2.0, distinguishing the category and >>> progress. >>> >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_Proposing-a-project-for-NumPy-20-release>Proposing >>> a project for NumPy 2.0 release >>> To start a project, there is one important thing: Believe that your >>> change makes NumPy better and commit to trying to make it happen. >>> To have a proposal listed on the NumPy 2.0 project board, we require the >>> following: >>> >>> - At least two champions for each proposal, one of whom must be a >>> NumPy core developer or similar to one in standing. >>> - A brief assessment of the anticipated impact on downstream and >>> end-users. This means assessing how many users/what groups of users are >>> affected and in what way. >>> - Support by the NumPy community or Steering Council (ideally both). >>> Positive feedback to your proposal on the NumPy mailing list is a strong >>> indicator of the community support. >>> >>> If *any* of the above requirements are not met, proposals will be >>> listed as “candidate”. NumPy maintainers will review “candidate” projects >>> on a case by case basis. >>> We suggest including a brief header in every proposal (issue or PR): >>> >>> * **Champions**: >>> * **Severity**: How does it affect users? >>> * **Affects**: Who/how many users does it affect? >>> >>> Any further details or adjustments shall be added on request. Large >>> changes may require their own NEP when requested by a maintainer. >>> As a *suggestion*, “affects” could be roughly guided by the number of >>> users: *rare*, *limited*, *common*, and *ubiquitous*. While “severity” >>> could be *minor*, *typical* (code update needed), *severe* (e.g. large >>> change/difficult to find), *critical* (incorrect results or no clear >>> path for fixing things). The two together can then be used as a basis >>> for decision making and discussion. >>> >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_Scope-of-work>Scope >>> of work >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_High-priority-projects>*High >>> priority projects* >>> The projects in this section are considered high impact from the >>> compatibility point of view. >>> Unless otherwise noted, these are currently proposals, most of these >>> changes have their own NEPs which should be accepted. >>> >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_Enable-breaking-the-C-API>Enable >>> breaking the C-API >>> NumPy needs to define a process for breaking C-API. This project does >>> not define *what* is broke, this is done separately on a case-by-case >>> basis. >>> We simply assume that sufficient changes will be done to make this >>> worthwhile. >>> >>> - *Status*: Planning >>> - *Champion*: Matti Picus (?), Sebastian Berg (?) >>> - *Severity*: Severe (for maintainers without a plan), typical for >>> users >>> - *Affects*: Library maintainers, some users >>> - *Notes*: >>> - Many users may have issues if pip installing a very new NumPy >>> version without updating other libraries. We assume that this isn’t a >>> common scenario and will mostly result in clear errors. >>> - All libraries will have to be recompiled. The transition plan >>> will ensure that libraries adhering to best practices will have an >>> easy >>> transition. >>> >>> *Note:* A full plan is still outstanding and may require its own NEP. >>> >>> >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_Adopt-NEP-50>Adopt >>> NEP 50 >>> Adopting NEP 50 changes the promotion behavior of NumPy scalars by >>> removing any value-based casting. Details for this change are discussed >>> in :ref:NEP50. >>> >>> - *Status*: Largely implemented, but open for discussions and open >>> questions to be addressed. >>> - *Champion*: Sebastian Berg, … >>> - *Severity*: High in rare cases, some results can change or memory >>> can bloat. >>> - *Affects*: Many users, but hopefully not most as one needs to use >>> smaller than default precision types to be affected. >>> >>> >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_A-thorough-cleanup-of-the-Python-API>A >>> thorough cleanup of the Python API >>> The NumPy API is quite messy, with many functions and aliases that are >>> not recommended for use, namespaces that are private but missing >>> underscores, inconsistencies in argument names, and more. Changes will >>> include removing aliases and outdated functionality (including many things >>> that have been doc-deprecated already), making namespaces private, and >>> making function signatures more consistent. >>> >>> - *Status*: Needs a separate NEP, and deprecations in 1.25.0 for >>> what can be deprecated in a sensible way. >>> - *Champion*: Ralf Gommers, Stefan van der Walt, … >>> - *Severity*: Medium. It is expected that a lot of projects and >>> users will see some breakage, but also that code changes to more >>> idiomatic >>> usage will be straightforward and compatible with both numpy 1.X and 2.0 >>> - *Affects*: Many users and downstream projects >>> >>> >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_Add-array-API-standard-support-to-the-main-namespace>Add >>> array API standard support to the main namespace >>> The main reason NEP 47 >>> <https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0047-array-api-standard.html#backward-compatibility> >>> aimed for a separate numpy.array_api submodule rather than the main >>> namespace is that casting rules differed too much. With NEP 50 (see above), >>> that will be resolved in NumPy 2.0. Having NumPy be a superset of the array >>> API standard will be a significant improvement for code portability to >>> other libraries (CuPy, JAX, PyTorch, etc.) and thereby address one of the >>> top user requests from the 2020 NumPy user survey >>> <https://numpy.org/user-survey-2020/> (GPU support). See the >>> numpy.array_api API docs >>> <https://numpy.org/devdocs/reference/array_api.html#table-of-differences-between-numpy-array-api-and-numpy> >>> for an overview of differences between it and the main namespace (the >>> “strictness” ones are not applicable). >>> >>> - *Status*: separate NEP to be written. >>> - *Champion*: Aaron Meurer, Ralf Gommers >>> - *Severity*: Medium. Most impact of breaking changes is likely >>> concentrated in a few widely used APIs (e.g., change semantics of >>> copy=False keyword to actually mean “don’t copy” rather than “copy >>> if needed”) >>> - *Affects*: most users and downstream projects >>> >>> >>> <#m_-2251458491041950985_m_-5453977658075525012_m_-4971028583323681657_Other-projects>*Other >>> projects* >>> See the project board <https://github.com/orgs/numpy/projects/9>. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ >>> Member address: ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ >> Member address: tyler.je.re...@gmail.com >> > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ > Member address: asmeu...@gmail.com >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- numpy-discussion@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to numpy-discussion-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/numpy-discussion.python.org/ Member address: arch...@mail-archive.com
