Repository navigation
Using __array_interface__ instead of adding __sycl_usm_array_interface__ #191
Description
Using 2 properties __array_interface__ and __sycl_usm_array_interface__ in dparray requires 2 checks in downstream libraries.
Performance penalty.
Related to #184.
Activity
[-]Usgin __array_interface__ instead of adding __sycl_usm_array_interface__[/-][+]Using __array_interface__ instead of adding __sycl_usm_array_interface__[/+]oleksandr-pavlyk commentedon Dec 3, 2020
These two properties serve different purposes, and can not be combined. One does not have to check for both. Please clarify what performance penalty you have in mind.
PokhodenkoSA commentedon Dec 3, 2020
Does it mean that we will always know exactly which property we need?
Double checking both properties. One for SYCL queue (
__sycl_usm_array_interface__) and another for fallback to usual__array_interface__if the first property is not available.PokhodenkoSA commentedon Dec 3, 2020
I know this cases from dpNP and @shssf.
Also I have asked @DrTodd13 about this new property.
Just want to know the reasons behind introducing this property and comparing to other variants (i.e. extend
__array_interface__dict with new items).oleksandr-pavlyk commentedon Dec 3, 2020
NumPy checks for
__array_interface__trying to recognize a Python object as a "duck-array", also known as "array-like" . This property has been largely superseded by Python buffer protocol.Python objects backed by USM memory export
__sycl_usm_array_interface__to be recognized as carriers of USM memory.diptorupd commentedon Jan 31, 2021
Closing since @oleksandr-pavlyk's comments explains the rationale of why the two attributes are needed.