Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement element-wise unary operation -- copy op #52

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 16, 2023

Conversation

BruceDai
Copy link
Contributor

@huningxin @fdwr PTAL, thanks.

Copy link
Contributor

@huningxin huningxin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM with a comment, thanks!

@@ -736,4 +736,63 @@ describe('test unary', function() {
],
[3, 2, 2, 1]);
});

it('identity', function() {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You may want to cover 0-D scalar input. @fdwr is working on the spec change and I am working a CL to Chromium. It would be good to have WPT test coverage as well. Thanks.

Copy link

@fdwr fdwr Nov 11, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@fdwr is working on the spec change

I'm a little behind (got COVID Wednesday), but feeling better - I should continue Monday. 🤞

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No worries, glad to hear you are feeling better, have a good recovery first.

@BruceDai BruceDai changed the title Implement identity Implement element-wise unary operation -- copy op Nov 14, 2023
@BruceDai
Copy link
Contributor Author

To align with webmachinelearning/webnn#478, I renamed identity to copy. @huningxin @fdwr Please take another look, thanks.

@fdwr
Copy link

fdwr commented Nov 14, 2023

Note the spec is in active review, and there probably will be feedback from reviewers, and quite possibly additional renames. So it probably doesn't make sense to make too many of these renaming changes while the spec change is still in active review.

Copy link
Contributor

@huningxin huningxin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

slgtm

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants