On Sun, 2017-05-28 at 14:53 -0600, Charles R Harris wrote:
> Hi All,
> This post is to open a discussion of the future of ufuncs. There are
> two contradictory ideas that have floated about regarding ufuncs
> evolution. One is to generalize ufuncs to operate on buffers,
> essentially separating the
Hi Chuck,
Like Sebastian, I wonder a little about what level you are talking
about. Presumably, it is the actual implementation of the ufunc? I.e.,
this is not about the upper logic that decides which `__array_ufunc__`
to call, etc.
If so, I agree with you that it would seem to make most sense to
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Marten van Kerkwijk <
m.h.vankerkw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Chuck,
>
> Like Sebastian, I wonder a little about what level you are talking
> about. Presumably, it is the actual implementation of the ufunc? I.e.,
> this is not about the upper logic that decides whi
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Charles R Harris
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Marten van Kerkwijk
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Chuck,
>>
>> Like Sebastian, I wonder a little about what level you are talking
>> about. Presumably, it is the actual implementation of the ufunc? I.e.,
>> this
