Merged
Conversation
antonwolfy
requested review from
ekomarova,
ndgrigorian and
xaleryb
as code owners
antonwolfy
force-pushed
the
drop-support-remainder
branch
from
afcee86 to
451eea9
Compare
Collaborator
|
This PR fixes the issue |
Collaborator
Author
|
@ndgrigorian, please review |
ndgrigorian
reviewed
Sep 11, 2025
ndgrigorian
approved these changes
Sep 12, 2025
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
3 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
The PR drops support for
remainderufunc, because Intel(R) MKL function v?Remainder follows C's modulo operator, but NumPy is expecting Python's one.Currently there is no way to achieve the same result as NumPy with any set of MKL functions.