-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
Add mockchunks function #237
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
This function could then be overloaded by wrapping packges.
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.
Would it make sense to allow any sensible definition of chunks
here? I think rechunkeddiskarray takes tuples of chunksize like (10, 10, 3)
for instance...
src/rechunk.jl
Outdated
Rechunk the underlying data of A into the given `chunks`. | ||
|
||
""" | ||
rechunk(data::AbstractDiskArray, chunks::GridChunks) = RechunkedDiskArray(data , chunks) |
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.
rechunk(data::AbstractDiskArray, chunks::GridChunks) = RechunkedDiskArray(data, chunks)
just for style
I start wondering if I think we need either a different name or at least a better docstring explaining that no physical rechunking is happening here. |
Yes, i am also wondering whether the name setchunks makes more sense. I could copy the docstring from the YAXArrays.setchunks function and remove the YAXArray specifics.
|
Even |
Fakechunks sounds like it is not chunked at all. But I see your point. pretendchunk And if we rename the function we should also rename the main object because it would be good to have them in accordance. |
Is there any conclusion/progress on this one. It would be a shame if this got blocked just because we can't agree on a name. So, maybe we discuss in our next big Raser call? |
Can we use |
I just did the renaming. As soon as this is in a mergeable state and someone had a look I am also going to rename the file from rechunk.jl to mockchunks.jl |
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.
Looks good to me, just some minor doc improvements
Co-authored-by: Anshul Singhvi <anshulsinghvi@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Anshul Singhvi <anshulsinghvi@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Anshul Singhvi <anshulsinghvi@gmail.com>
@meggart if you're happy with the new name this looks good to merge to me |
Oh one thing @felixcremer can we add Or maybe |
I will add a deprecation |
I am happy with the new name. Feel free to merge |
This adds a mockchunks function which would return a MockChunkedDiskArray
This function could then be overloaded by wrapping packages like DimensionalData.
This was discussed in #35 but is not a fix to that but would open up a better workaround.
This would need some tests