-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
ENH: unary functions overhaul; better input validation #148
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
@@ -168,9 +231,6 @@ def _array_vals(): | |||
for d in _floating_dtypes: | |||
yield asarray(1.0, dtype=d) | |||
|
|||
# Use the latest version of the standard so all functions are included | |||
set_array_api_strict_flags(api_version="2024.12") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
redundant with auto-applied fixture
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
Let keep this PR open for a while though, in case somebody has opinions on generating unary functions from a decorator. I personally think this is a good change, but there were concerns in #100
res = xp.where(cond, 1, x2) | ||
assert res.device == device | ||
res = xp.where(cond, x1, 2) | ||
assert res.device == device |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This and the following tests are great. I imaging we'll want to parrot them in array-api-tests at some point.
Note: this does not close #102 , as Python sneakily callls |
Exactly. |
@ev-br good to merge now? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
given the merge of gh-100, we may as well be consistent, so no worries from my side. Thanks both!
is the CI failure on main related to this PR? Or was that pre-existing? |
I'm on holiday and I can't bisect anything, but it looks to me like a scalar arg is being passed on 2023.12. If the issue is in array-api-strict or array-api-tests I can't debug from here, but I don't think it was caused by this PR. |
xref #145
clip
, andwhere
where
is not an Arrayclip
, andwhere
where