Hacktoberfest 2026：維護者為十月標記出來的 issue，仍然開放、適合新手。 瀏覽 Hacktoberfest issue

We don't know where ufuncs are from!

未關閉
#70 6 則留言 0 個 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 檢視

還沒有人認領這個 Issue。

評估

難度
5/5
預估耗時
一週以上
新手友好度
30/100
Issue 類型
功能
描述清晰度
需要釐清
活躍度
停滯
技術堆疊
python
領域
devtools

研究方向

首先閱讀用於記錄 ufunc 方法呼叫、目前呈現其聯集的追蹤與結果彙總程式碼。完成內容應包括每個 ufunc 的方法計數，並識別每個 ufunc 的定義或匯入位置，包括來自 NumPy 和 SciPy 的情況；關於哪個模組匯出某個型別的相關問題可以另行處理。

由索引模型根據 Issue 內容生成。

描述

bug

During the tracing, it's helpful to know not only which methods on the ufuncs class are called (__call__, reduce, etc) but also which ufuncs themselves are used (add, multiple, etc).

Currently, we are presenting the results of those, not as the product of those two features, but as their union. i.e. we should stats for the reduce method on the ufunc class, but we don't show how many times reduce was called on add vs multiple. That's one "issue", but the other more pressing one is we don't know where ufuncs come from!

All we know is their names. Up until now, I had been assuming they are all defined in the numpy module. However, scipy for example has many that are not.

We should somehow figure out how to understand where they were defined, or what module they were imported from.

I guess to do this, we would have to do some kind of traversal of imported modules, to understand where they are defined? This also could be helpful for the related problem of recording, which module, exports a certain type instead of which module it was defined in.

主要語言
Python
星號
74
分支
6
30 天內沒有已合併 PR

貢獻指南

這個儲存庫沒有索引到貢獻指南

從這裡開始

  1. 先讀完整個 Issue，再讀專案的貢獻指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言說明你要接手 —— 這能避免兩個人做同樣的事。
  3. Fork 儲存庫，在一個分支上完成修改。
  4. 送出 Pull Request，並在描述裡引用這個 Issue 編號。

data-apis/python-record-api 的其他 Issue

查看 data-apis/python-record-api 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Python Issue

把新 issue 寄到你的電子郵件信箱

精選適合新手參與的 GitHub issue 摘要。