Closed mmcky closed 9 months ago
Hi @mmcky,
In this case, we might want to remove the discussion on numba.jit
for now and replace them with njit
or jit(nopython=True)
as falling-back behaviours will be deprecated. I think the principle now is to use njit
and jit(nopython=True)
whenever possible. Therefore, instead of discussing nopython
decorator, should we talk a little bit more about different decorators, which I find very helpful in some cases?
Hi @mmcky,
Sorry for another message :)
I will do the first part first to remove the deprecation warning with minimal changes in text:
In this case, we might want to remove the discussion on
numba.jit
for now and replace them withnjit
orjit(nopython=True)
as falling-back behaviours will be deprecated.
and we can get @jstac's opinion on the second action:
Therefore, instead of discussing
nopython
decorator, should we talk a little bit more about different decorators, which I find very helpful in some cases?
Does this sound like a good plan to you?
Many thanks in advance.
@HumphreyYang , that sounds like a good approach to me. Of course parallel=True
should not be discussed in detail, since it's treated in the next lecture.
We should open an issue to switch over to a simple @jit
once 0.59 comes out, so we don't forget.
@jit
with @njit
parallel=True
. Remove the small section on nopython
decorator.
@HumphreyYang would you mind clicking through the site and check for
Deprecation
there are a few places we need to fix up some warnings such as
https://python-programming.quantecon.org/numba.html#decorator-notation