On 28/06/18 17:18, Stephan Hoyer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 1:12 PM Marten van Kerkwijk
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
For C classes like the ufuncs, it seems `__self__` is defined for
methods as well (at least, `np.add.reduce.__self__` gives
`np.add`), but not a `__func__`. There is a `__name__`
(="reduce"), though, which means that I think one can still
retrieve what is needed (obviously, this also means
`__array_ufunc__` could have been simpler...)
Good point!
I guess this means we should encourage using __name__ rather than
__func__. I would not want to preclude refactoring classes from Python
to C/Cython.
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
There was opposition to that in a PR I made to provide a wrapper around
matmul to turn it into a ufunc. It would have left the __name__ but
changed the __func__.
https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/11061#issuecomment-387468084
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
