Wessel
Wessel
Hmm, let's leave it open for now then to see if anything else comes up. I'll try to release the `warn_redefinition` keyword soon, which should be an easy change.
@nstarman `v2.5.1` makes redefinition warnings opt-in by setting `warn_redefinition=True` in `Dispatcher`, `Function`, or `Resolver`.
Thanks @nstarman! This again looks fantastic. :) Merging right away!
@nstarman Adding a short example to the doc that explain this, the massive performance benefits, and the caching problems would be super nice. :) I really like this. If we...
Hey @hodgespodge and @leycec! I'm super sorry for the very slow reply. This slipped through at the time. ☹️ @hodgespodge, if you invert the order of the decorators, this should...
> The easiest thing might be to simply record what the units should be at the start based on the order of the derivative, and then just adding them back...
> (…) there is no way to strip the unit information from within a function. For a given function `f` which might take in inputs with units and/or produce outputs...
That looks promising!
@ilan-gold Although `Iterable[T]` isn't currently supported (though hopefully later this year 🚀!), you can get the desired behaviour by typing with `list`: ```python import plum @plum.dispatch def f(x: list[int]): print("int!")...
@ilan-gold, @leycec, aha, of course `Sequence` is a much better workaround! In fact, that’s nearly as good as `Iterable`. :) Awesome. @leycec Obviously there’s no need for any form of...