BUG: Do not use nonzero fastpath on unaligned arrays #20179
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
The fast-path does not handle unalgined access, previously only bools had a fast path (and bools are by definition always aligned since they are stored in a single byte/char). Closes numpygh-19592
|
Thanks Sebastian. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The fast-path does not handle unalgined access, previously only
bools had a fast path (and bools are by definition always aligned
since they are stored in a single byte/char).
Closes gh-19592
I also prefer the "macro" check, since user-dtypes can mess with the
kind. The fast-path already has anelsize > 8assertion (but not check). But if we anticipate hardware withlong longbigger than 64bits, I am happy to put it back.