html_url,issue_url,id,node_id,user,created_at,updated_at,author_association,body,reactions,performed_via_github_app,issue
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4208#issuecomment-663148752,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4208,663148752,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2MzE0ODc1Mg==,306380,2020-07-23T17:57:55Z,2020-07-23T17:57:55Z,MEMBER,Dask collections tokenize quickly.  We just use the name I think.,"{""total_count"": 1, ""+1"": 1, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,653430454
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4208#issuecomment-663123118,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4208,663123118,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2MzEyMzExOA==,306380,2020-07-23T17:05:30Z,2020-07-23T17:05:30Z,MEMBER,"> That's exactly what's been done in Pint (see hgrecco/pint#1129)! @dcherian's points go beyond just that and address what Pint hasn't covered yet through the standard collection interface.

Ah, great.  My bad.


> how do we ask a duck dask array to rechunk itself? pint seems to forward the .rechunk call but that isn't formalized anywhere AFAICT.

I think that you would want to make a pint array rechunk method that called down to the dask array rechunk method.  My guess is that this might come up in other situations as well.

> less important: should duck dask arrays cache their token somewhere? dask.array uses .name to do this and xarray uses that to check equality cheaply. We can use tokenize of course. But I'm wondering if it's worth asking duck dask arrays to cache their token as an optimization.

I think that implementing the `dask.base.normalize_token` method should be fine.  This will probably be very fast because you're probably just returning the name of the underlying dask array as well as the unit of the pint array/quatity.  I don't think that caching would be necessary here.

It's also possible that we could look at the `__dask_layers__` method to get this information.  My memory is a bit fuzzy here though.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,653430454
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4208#issuecomment-663119539,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4208,663119539,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2MzExOTUzOQ==,306380,2020-07-23T16:58:27Z,2020-07-23T16:58:27Z,MEMBER,My guess is that we could steal the xarray.DataArray implementations over to Pint without causing harm.,"{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,653430454
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/4208#issuecomment-663119334,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/4208,663119334,MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDY2MzExOTMzNA==,306380,2020-07-23T16:58:06Z,2020-07-23T16:58:06Z,MEMBER,"In Xarray we implemented the Dask collection spec.  https://docs.dask.org/en/latest/custom-collections.html#the-dask-collection-interface

We might want to do that with Pint as well, if they're going to contain Dask things.  That way Dask operations like `dask.persist`, `dask.visualize`, and `dask.compute` will work normally.  ","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,653430454