-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 366
Add properties to get chunk and shard slices #3573
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
Draft
dstansby
wants to merge
1
commit into
zarr-developers:main
Choose a base branch
from
dstansby:chunk-shard-slices
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1 @@ | ||
| Added new ``Array.chunk_slices`` and ``Array.shard_slices`` to get slices aligned with array chunks and shards respectively. |
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
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
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
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.
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.
nitpicking the name: i find "slice" to be kind of ambiguous between a verb and a noun, and it also locks us in to returning slice objects, so what if we use the word
"region"instead?and also I think it's helpful if the name of this routine makes it clear that it's an iterator. So what if we call it
iter_chunk_regions, i.e. the name of the routine it wraps 😜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.
re. name, I think "slices" is unambiguously a noun because it's plural? I looked at NumPy (https://numpy.org/doc/stable/user/basics.indexing.html#slicing-and-striding), and they use the terms "index", "selection tuple", or "slicing tuple". If we try and stay consistent with NumPy, how about "chunk_indices"?
I like "regions", but to me it's ambiguous whether that means the index, or the array data at that index. If we settle on it that could be fixed by documentation and consistent use though.
re. iterator, do you mean generator? A list/string etc. are also iterators, but using a
yieldmakes this into more specifically a generator.So perhaps
generate_chunk_indices? I find that a bit clunky though,is much nicer than
(or
iter_chunk_indices)which is why I prefer simply
chunk_indices. I don't knkow if there's prior art in other libraries for naming generators?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.
generators are iterators, and my thinking was that putting "iter" in the name conveys that users should expect to iterate over the value returned by calling this method.
when I think of iterating over indices, I think of iterating over tuples of coordinates, e.g.,
(0, 0, 0),(0, 0, 1), .... which is what_iter_chunk_coords/_iter_shard_coordsdo right 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.
I worry that this ambiguity will hold for any name we pick :)