issue_comments: 663123118

This data as json

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-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