NEP: update NEP 58 text to reflect current discussion/prototype - #32745
Merged
Merged
Conversation
jorenham
self-requested a review
September 21, 2026 22:29
mhvk
approved these changes
Sep 21, 2026
mhvk
left a comment
mhvk
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I read the whole text rather than the diff; looks all good!
Member
|
Thanks @ngoldbaum |
Riaz1729
pushed a commit
to Riaz1729/numpy
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 23, 2026
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
PR summary
Updates the NEP text to reflect recent work on NumPy
main. In particular, this accounts for fixes forStringDTypein #31825, #32095, #32097, #32356, #32497, #32418, #32563, and #32564 thatByteStringDTypewill inherit for free.This also adds some discussion about adding a
vbytesscalar type, which the discussion converged on as the way to go.I deleted the "open questions" section since I think this is mostly final and we've resolved the issues.
I also added ideas that came up in the mailing list discussion that I did not implement into the rejected ideas section. Ping @jorenham: I'd appreciate getting your explicit OK that we're rejecting those ideas. I also want to make sure the text captures your point of view.
Ping @mhvk as well since you also participated substantively in the mailing list discussion.
AI Disclosure
I used an AI to reconcile the current text with recent work and help me update the text.