JuliaMath / JuliaMath/MeasureBase.jl
Use `Sampler` interface?
- Dominant language
- Julia
- Stars
- 32
- Forks
- 4
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
In a recent Zulip discussion (https://julialang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/137791-general/topic/Static.20code.20blocks/near/289768224), @Seelengrab reminded me of the `Random.Sampler` interface, with this example:
```julia
struct BoundedFloat64
min::Float64
max::Float64
end
Base.eltype(::Type{BoundedFloat64}) = Float64
Base.rand(_::AbstractRNG, b::Random.SamplerTrivial{BoundedFloat64}) = b[].min + (b[].max - b[].min) * rand(Float64)
Random.Sampler(_::Type{<:AbstractRNG}, bf64::BoundedFloat64, r::Random.Repetition) = Random.SamplerTrivial(bf64)
```
This makes it so you can call e.g.
```julia
julia> rand(BoundedFloat64(0.5, 10.0), 3)
3-element Vector{Float64}:
0.8715965799597065
4.250901702717998
0.9709465785383822
```
Our current implementation ignore this interface, instead working entirely in terms of dispatching to `rand`. Our `rand` takes three arguments, with these defaults:
```julia
Base.rand(d::AbstractMeasure) = rand(Random.GLOBAL_RNG, Float64, d)
Base.rand(T::Type, μ::AbstractMeasure) = rand(Random.GLOBAL_RNG, T, μ)
Base.rand(rng::AbstractRNG, d::AbstractMeasure) = rand(rng, Float64, d)
```
Here the type argument in the second position is passed to the "inner" `rand` call. For example,
```julia
julia> using MeasureBase
julia> rand(Float64, StdExponential())
1.8034180730760465
julia> rand(Float32, StdExponential())
2.1787617f0
julia> rand(Float16, StdExponential())
Float16(0.1595)
```
I think it's very useful to keep this kind of flexibility, but it could help to also have thing set up in a way to take advantage of the Sampler interface. It's very new to me and doesn't seem to be well-documented. But maybe we can go from examples or ask for help if we get stuck.
One thing to consider is that we can easily build measures over spaces more complex than a simple scalar or array. To minimize allocations in cases like this, I've previously explored having every `rand` have two steps: an allocation, followed by a call to `rand!` to fill in the values. It's not clear to me if this is the "right" way to do things. As usual in this ecosystem, we need to think a lot about composability and its impact on performance.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
Assessment
This issue has not been assessed yet.