Weirdly, I never received Chuck's original email in this thread. Should some list admin be informed?
I also am not sure what/where Julian's comments were, so I second the call for context :-). Putting it off until 1.10 doesn't seem like an obviously bad idea to me, but specifics would help... (__numpy_ufunc__ is the new system for allowing arbitrary third party objects to override how ufuncs are applied to them, i.e. it means np.sin(sparsemat) and np.sin(gpuarray) can be defined to do something sensible. Conceptually it replaces the old __array_prepare__/__array_wrap__ system, which was limited to ndarray subclasses and has major limits on what you can do. Of course __array_prepare/wrap__ will also continue to be supported for compatibility.) -n On 16 Jul 2014 00:10, "Benjamin Root" <ben.r...@ou.edu> wrote: > Perhaps a bit of context might be useful? How is numpy_ufunc different > from the ufuncs that we know and love? What are the known implications? > What are the known shortcomings? Are there ABI and/or API concerns between > 1.9 and 1.10? > > Ben Root > > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> Julian has raised the question of including numpy_ufunc in numpy 1.9. I >> don't feel strongly one way or the other, but it doesn't seem to be >> finished yet and 1.10 might be a better place to work out the remaining >> problems along with the astropy folks testing possible uses. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Chuck >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NumPy-Discussion mailing list >> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org >> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
