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/7457#issuecomment-1397480084,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7457,1397480084,IC_kwDOAMm_X85TS9qU,35968931,2023-01-19T19:14:04Z,2023-01-19T19:14:04Z,MEMBER,"> But then da.data will be of this protocol type and not the array class that you assume it has.
For internal type checking this is what we want but for the user this will be confusing.

When will the user be using this type annotation? Isn't all this typing stuff basically a dev feature (internally and downstream)?","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1548948097
https://github.com/pydata/xarray/issues/7457#issuecomment-1397465527,https://api.github.com/repos/pydata/xarray/issues/7457,1397465527,IC_kwDOAMm_X85TS6G3,35968931,2023-01-19T19:02:09Z,2023-01-19T19:02:09Z,MEMBER,"Doesn't the [python array api standard effort](https://data-apis.org/array-api/latest/) have some type of duck array protocol we could import? I feel like this has been mentioned before. Then we would start with @Illviljan 's suggestion and replace it with the correct duck array protocol later.

We might also consider that in the context of [different distributed array backends](https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/7019) dask arrays define a more specific API that includes methods like `.chunk()` too. Standardisation of that is a long-term dream though, not an immediate problem.","{""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,1548948097