You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The Python code looks flat like C from 1972.
But there are classes and modules in Python. :-)
For example urProgramCreateWithBinary could become oneapi.program.create_with_binary.
I am unsure that squashing the imported modules like
The ur.py code contains automatically generated raw FFI bindings. Eventually, it might make sense to build a rich idiomatic python library on top of it, but there are no immediate plans to do so. That's because the UR interface is still being defined and would be a moving target for any higher-level software layer.
Thanks for the clarification.
But since it is automatically generated, this is even better: you could improve the automatic generator to add the right types at the right place and the right hierarchy. Otherwise it will pollute all the Python global namespace.
The Python code looks flat like C from 1972.
But there are classes and modules in Python. :-)
For example
urProgramCreateWithBinary
could becomeoneapi.program.create_with_binary
.I am unsure that squashing the imported modules like
instead of
improves the code quality and readability. https://peps.python.org/pep-0008/#imports
I am curious about how the C++ API will look like. :-)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: