Define FFT planning flags independent from FFTW
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100
- Issue type
- Feature
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Activity status
- Stale
- Tech stack
- julia
- Domain
- backend-api-design
Research direction
Start with the documented plan_fft API and its flags argument, then review how FFT implementations such as FFTW consume those values. Define the framework-level flags and establish how implementations adapt them without AbstractFFTs depending on FFTW; done means the API no longer documents FFTW-specific flags.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
The FFT planning functions, plan_fft et al., accept a keyword argument flags that is used to provide options to the planning function of the FFT implementation. The flags argument is currently documented to be "a bitwise-or of FFTW planner flags". This effectively creates a documented dependency on FFTW, even though FFTW is not a dependency of AbstractFFTs (in fact it's the other way around). It would be preferable to have AbstractFFTs define any and all flags that FFT planners may wish to use and then have FFT implementations, such as FFTW, adapt the flags from AbstractFFTs values to suitable values for use with the underlying implementation as they see fit.
For an example of why the current approach is problematic, see https://github.com/JuliaGPU/CUDA.jl/issues/1559
- Dominant language
- Julia
- Stars
- 135
- Forks
- 40
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Getting set up
This project ships no dev container, Dockerfile or contributing guide, so setting up is up to you: start from its README, and see our first-contribution guide for the general steps.
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from JuliaMath/AbstractFFTs.jl
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 72/100
JuliaMath/AbstractFFTs.jl#159 ·
-
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 35/100
JuliaMath/AbstractFFTs.jl#147 ·
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 20/100
JuliaMath/AbstractFFTs.jl#135 ·
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 28/100
JuliaMath/AbstractFFTs.jl#125 · 2 reactions ·
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 35/100
JuliaMath/AbstractFFTs.jl#122 · 3 comments ·
All issues in JuliaMath/AbstractFFTs.jl
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
WaterLily-jl/WaterLily.jl#367 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
R_to_gamma and R_to_v are wrong for |Z| != 1 (e.g. heavy ions)Possibly taken @DavidSagan claimed this today. Open
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 88/100
bmad-sim/BeamTracking.jl#366 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
bug
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
SciML/PETScDiffEq.jl#277 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
enhancement good first issue help wanted
Difficulty 2/5 Half a day Newbie friendliness 82/100
-
SavedSubsystem with an integer save_idxs maps the index the wrong way roundPossibly taken @ChrisRackauckas claimed this today. Open
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
SciML/SciMLBase.jl#1643 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 2 days