Improve logic of dpnp.outer() #1239
Merged
Conversation
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
antonwolfy
force-pushed
the
outer_with_two_vectors
branch
from
5c798b4 to
29cffab
Compare
oleksandr-pavlyk
approved these changes
Nov 30, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
As was reported in issue #1203,
dpnp.outer()is falling back on numpy call. This is because DPNP called multiplication function in a loop per each pair of elements from input vectors. Whiledpnp.__mul__()is falling on numpy if an input argument is a scalar.The PR is intended to improve
dpnp.outer()logic. It can be enough to invokedpnp.__mul__()only once with both arguments asdpnp_array, instead of the looping over the elements.