[Numpy-discussion] Re: A better syntax for using ufunc.at?

2024-07-25 Thread Oras P.
I can see that. I wanted to be more caught up with the discussions around this than anything else. Although I also have a lot of free time right now temporarily, and could make an attempt at implementing it. Is there any other channel I can get more feedback on this?

[Numpy-discussion] Re: A better syntax for using ufunc.at?

2024-07-25 Thread Oras P.
This is interesting, thank you for pointing it out! Good to know this is not a Numpy-only problem, I guess lol. Though the proposed syntax looks similar to my idea, I believe they are talking about a different problem there relating to translating python code to an accelerated language. I simply

[Numpy-discussion] Re: A better syntax for using ufunc.at?

2024-07-25 Thread Dom Grigonis
It would be nicer, yes. However, at least from my experience, it does not seem to be used often enough to go extra mile for the sake of convenience alone. Regards, dg > On 24 Jul 2024, at 13:49, Oras P. wrote: > > I am aware that to do unbuffered addition operation, I can use `np.add.at` > l