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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
It's implemented for numbers (including complex) and boolean.
On a 1D array it's about 7x faster than numpy. For higher dimensions it is slower, and it is much slower for Fortran-order arrays, for the same reasons as in #9400.
This is almost my first PR for numba and I'm pretty new to LLVM as well, so I've got a few questions:
byteswap
on a scalar withinplace=True
raises an exception, and I've mirrored that behaviour. Since numba is statically typed, an alternative is to simply not support that useless parameter, which would move the error to compile time (generally a good thing) but be less compatible with numpy. Any thoughts?@intrinsic
scalar function into a ufunc and calling that (which uses a sensible iteration order for Fortran-order arrays), but ran into some cyclic import problems.