-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17
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
Coherent policy needed on array types #181
Comments
Make it all Note also that using See also the jax policy on type checking: jax-ml/jax#8224 (tl, dr; make everything alias to Any) |
First, let's have a type, i.e. I think there are arrays that don't make sense to be Then there are operators, like |
A good part of this issue has been addressed in #410, but the question of whether all |
It's worth noting the availability of
Also, see section "JAX Typing Best Practices" in jax.typing. |
Suggestion: pre- and post-processing functions should take numpy or jax arrays, while functions expected to be used within optimization problems etc. should take jax arrays. |
This issue is related to both typing and explicit array conversion and creation (the latter form being closely related to the subject of #93). At the moment we have a somewhat random mix of
Array
andJaxArray
type specifications within our code. A coherent policy is needed as a guide to addressing the existing random usage, and ensuring that it doesn't persist into new code.The simplest policy is obviously to simply require that all scico functions and methods take and return
JaxArray
types. Is this both feasible and desirable? If not, what are the counter-examples?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: