On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:13 AM, Travis E. Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > The good news is that the patch just uses of the existing code to deal > with all the tricky issues (this is why the patch is so short). By the way, > sort could be implemented with the proposed specifications, its signature > would be "(i)->(i)". I agree that it would be nice if that code could be > made somewhat clearer; however, I think that this task is orthogonal to the > generalized ufuncs patch, because there is no code overlap. > > > I agree with this. > > The way the suggested implementation basically works is to remove the > "core dimensions" from the input/output arrays, and then have the existing > code handle all the intricacies over the "loop" dimensions. > > > > Reduce methods are currently not supported (an error is raised). > Therefore, the current patch does not forestall anything and the desired > functionality can be added whenever it is clear what would be best. > > > > I do not think that it would makes sense to specify/implement all > possible extensions, optimizations, concrete ufuncs, morphing of existing > numpy functions to ufuncs, etc. at once; presumably it is much better to > start with a small but extremely flexible specification of generalized > ufuncs first. > > > One of the key reasons I'm enthused about the patch is because it's so > small. By enhancing the ufunc object and without changing the > signature of the underlying function, the patch is able to implement the > general description of a generalized ufunc. > > I think it is useful to evaluate whether or not a few more changes will > allow more functionality with little cost, but I don't think it is worth > holding up the patch hoping that the code will get "cleaned-up" (which > all code needs according to somebody's definition of cleaning). > I think the plan is that 1.2.1 will come out before the end of the year and it would be reasonable to put the patch in there. As gen_ufuncs are currently unused there is no practical effect to waiting until after the 1.2 release. Chuck
_______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
