[WIP] numpy_ufunc: Allow custom ufuncs to be defined #1325
+575
−27
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Closed
4 tasks
Contributor
|
This is really interesting! 😄 I know it's been quite a while now since this PR was raised - but would it be possible for you to add a code sample showing an example/intended usage or a test case of this new feature? I wanted to test this out and I think having that would add a lot of clarity to the PR in general. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I ended up implementing this for the following feature:
RobotLocomotion#12
This is a very minor adjustment for a WIP submission; things left to do:
detail/inteference.hto be C++11-friendly, or ditch it and inline the function signature inference - I've seen this mechanism more or less copied+pasted in several locations in the code, and had pulled this from my implementation here in preparation for wrapping things likedefwithout having to repeating myself too muchautoreturns :/ That makes things a tad... inconvenient. Will see if I can make a clever workaround, or ditch it and copy-and-paste the structure :(May relate #1294?