Clyther for Direct, Node, PythonFunction about nengo-ocl HOT 6 CLOSED

No, I never stumbled upon that. It definitely overlaps with some of the stuff I did, but just looking at the examples, it doesn't seem like one could do what I did with Clyther. Neat, though.

from nengo-ocl.

I raise this now because recent changes to Nengo have made it so that the lambdas inside of Direct connections, Nodes, and PythonFunction are now working on various numbers of inputs. It looks like nontrivial work to upgrade the sim_ocl.Simulator to support these new types, and also go through the ast_conversion code to handle various sorts function signatures. I was wondering if Clyther might handle some of that work.

from nengo-ocl.

Maybe next week after your coursework wraps up, we could go over the differences between what you did and Clyther and maybe refactor things, or not, but sort of walk through it. Will you be in the lab next Mon/Tues?

from nengo-ocl.

I'll be around on Monday and Tuesday, but I'll probably be writing up my project. What about Wednesday?

from nengo-ocl.

Update: These nested functions are still a problem for AST conversion. Need to look into fixing them and/or taking out the nested functions in the Direct mode stuff in nengo/builder/connection.py for slicing inputs.

from nengo-ocl.

With nengo/nengo#729, we no longer use nested lambdas to do the slicing, so this is less of an issue. We may want to revisit this at some point, though, so that we can convert a wider range of node functions into OCL code.

from nengo-ocl.