more docs (#421)

* more docs

* fix link

* nits + comments

docs/src/index.rst

@@ -36,9 +36,12 @@ are the CPU and GPU.
    :maxdepth: 1
 
    usage/quick_start
+   usage/lazy_evaluation
    usage/unified_memory
-   usage/using_streams
+   usage/indexing
+   usage/saving_and_loading
    usage/numpy
+   usage/using_streams
 
 .. toctree::
    :caption: Examples

docs/src/usage/indexing.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
+.. _indexing:
+
+Indexing Arrays
+===============
+
+.. currentmodule:: mlx.core
+
+For the most part, indexing an MLX :obj:`array` works the same as indexing a
+NumPy :obj:`numpy.ndarray`. See the `NumPy documentation
+<https://numpy.org/doc/stable/user/basics.indexing.html>`_ for more details on
+how that works.
+
+For example, you can use regular integers and slices (:obj:`slice`) to index arrays:
+
+.. code-block:: shell
+
+  >>> arr = mx.arange(10)
+  >>> arr[3]
+  array(3, dtype=int32)
+  >>> arr[-2]  # negative indexing works
+  array(8, dtype=int32)
+  >>> arr[2:8:2] # start, stop, stride
+  array([2, 4, 6], dtype=int32)
+
+For multi-dimensional arrays, the ``...`` or :obj:`Ellipsis` syntax works as in NumPy:
+
+.. code-block:: shell
+
+  >>> arr = mx.arange(8).reshape(2, 2, 2)
+  >>> arr[:, :, 0]
+  array(3, dtype=int32)
+  array([[0, 2],
+         [4, 6]], dtype=int32
+  >>> arr[..., 0]
+  array([[0, 2],
+         [4, 6]], dtype=int32
+
+You can index with ``None`` to create a new axis:
+
+.. code-block:: shell
+
+  >>> arr = mx.arange(8)
+  >>> arr.shape
+  [8]
+  >>> arr[None].shape
+  [1, 8]
+
+
+You can also use an :obj:`array` to index another :obj:`array`:
+
+.. code-block:: shell
+
+  >>> arr = mx.arange(10)
+  >>> idx = mx.array([5, 7]) 
+  >>> arr[idx]
+  array([5, 7], dtype=int32)
+
+Mixing and matching integers, :obj:`slice`, ``...``, and :obj:`array` indices
+works just as in NumPy.
+
+Other functions which may be useful for indexing arrays are :func:`take` and
+:func:`take_along_axis`.
+
+Differences from NumPy
+----------------------
+
+.. Note::
+
+  MLX indexing is different from NumPy indexing in two important ways:
+
+  * Indexing does not perform bounds checking. Indexing out of bounds is
+    undefined behavior.
+  * Boolean mask based indexing is not yet supported.
+
+The reason for the lack of bounds checking is that exceptions cannot propagate
+from the GPU. Performing bounds checking for array indices before launching the
+kernel would be extremely inefficient.
+
+Indexing with boolean masks is something that MLX may support in the future. In
+general, MLX has limited support for operations for which outputs
+*shapes* are dependent on input *data*. Other examples of these types of
+operations which MLX does not yet support include :func:`numpy.nonzero` and the
+single input version of :func:`numpy.where`.
+
+In Place Updates 
+----------------
+
+In place updates to indexed arrays are possible in MLX. For example:
+
+.. code-block:: shell
+
+  >>> a = mx.array([1, 2, 3])
+  >>> a[2] = 0
+  >>> a
+  array([1, 2, 0], dtype=int32)
+
+Just as in NumPy, in place updates will be reflected in all references to the
+same array:
+
+.. code-block:: shell
+
+  >>> a = mx.array([1, 2, 3])
+  >>> b = a
+  >>> b[2] = 0
+  >>> b
+  array([1, 2, 0], dtype=int32)
+  >>> a
+  array([1, 2, 0], dtype=int32)
+
+Transformations of functions which use in-place updates are allowed and work as
+expected. For example:
+
+.. code-block:: python
+
+   def fun(x, idx):
+       x[idx] = 2.0
+       return x.sum()
+
+   dfdx = mx.grad(fun)(mx.array([1.0, 2.0, 3.0]), mx.array([1]))
+   print(dfdx)  # Prints: array([1, 0, 1], dtype=float32)
+
+In the above ``dfdx`` will have the correct gradient, namely zeros at ``idx``
+and ones elsewhere.

docs/src/usage/lazy_evaluation.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
+.. _lazy eval:
+
+Lazy Evaluation
+===============
+
+.. currentmodule:: mlx.core
+
+Why Lazy Evaluation
+-------------------
+
+When you perform operations in MLX, no computation actually happens. Instead a
+compute graph is recorded. The actual computation only happens if an
+:func:`eval` is performed.
+
+MLX uses lazy evaluation because it has some nice features, some of which we
+describe below. 
+
+Transforming Compute Graphs
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+Lazy evaluation let's us record a compute graph without actually doing any
+computations. This is useful for function transformations like :func:`grad` and
+:func:`vmap` and graph optimizations like :func:`simplify`.
+
+Currently, MLX does not compile and rerun compute graphs. They are all
+generated dynamically. However, lazy evaluation makes it much easier to
+integrate compilation for future performance enhancements.
+
+Only Compute What You Use
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+In MLX you do not need to worry as much about computing outputs that are never
+used. For example:
+
+.. code-block:: python
+
+  def fun(x):
+      a = fun1(x)
+      b = expensive_fun(a)
+      return a, b
+
+  y, _ = fun(x)
+
+Here, we never actually compute the output of ``expensive_fun``. Use this
+pattern with care though, as the graph of ``expensive_fun`` is still built, and
+that has some cost associated to it.
+
+Similarly, lazy evaluation can be beneficial for saving memory while keeping
+code simple. Say you have a very large model ``Model`` derived from
+:obj:`mlx.nn.Module`. You can instantiate this model with ``model = Model()``.
+Typically, this will initialize all of the weights as ``float32``, but the
+initialization does not actually compute anything until you perform an
+:func:`eval`. If you update the model with ``float16`` weights, your maximum
+consumed memory will be half that required if eager computation was used
+instead.
+
+This pattern is simple to do in MLX thanks to lazy computation:
+
+.. code-block:: python
+
+  model = Model() # no memory used yet
+  model.load_weights("weights_fp16.safetensors")
+
+When to Evaluate
+----------------
+
+A common question is when to use :func:`eval`. The trade-off is between
+letting graphs get too large and not batching enough useful work.
+
+For example:
+
+.. code-block:: python
+
+  for _ in range(100):
+       a = a + b
+       mx.eval(a)
+       b = b * 2
+       mx.eval(b)
+
+This is a bad idea because there is some fixed overhead with each graph
+evaluation. On the other hand, there is some slight overhead which grows with
+the compute graph size, so extremely large graphs (while computationally
+correct) can be costly.
+
+Luckily, a wide range of compute graph sizes work pretty well with MLX:
+anything from a few tens of operations to many thousands of operations per
+evaluation should be okay.
+
+Most numerical computations have an iterative outer loop (e.g. the iteration in
+stochastic gradient descent). A natural and usually efficient place to use
+:func:`eval` is at each iteration of this outer loop.
+
+Here is a concrete example:
+
+.. code-block:: python
+
+   for batch in dataset:
+
+       # Nothing has been evaluated yet
+       loss, grad = value_and_grad_fn(model, batch)
+
+       # Still nothing has been evaluated
+       optimizer.update(model, grad)
+
+       # Evaluate the loss and the new parameters which will
+       # run the full gradient computation and optimizer update
+       mx.eval(loss, model.parameters())
+
+
+An important behavior to be aware of is when the graph will be implicitly
+evaluated. Anytime you ``print`` an array, convert it to an
+:obj:`numpy.ndarray`, or otherwise access it's memory via :obj:`memoryview`,
+the graph will be evaluated. Saving arrays via :func:`save` (or any other MLX
+saving functions) will also evaluate the array.
+
+
+Calling :func:`array.item` on a scalar array will also evaluate it. In the
+example above, printing the loss (``print(loss)``) or adding the loss scalar to
+a list (``losses.append(loss.item())``) would cause a graph evaluation. If 
+these lines are before ``mx.eval(loss, model.parameters())`` then this
+will be a partial evaluation, computing only the forward pass.
+
+Also, calling :func:`eval` on an array or set of arrays multiple times is
+perfectly fine. This is effectively a no-op.
+
+.. warning::
+
+  Using scalar arrays for control-flow will cause an evaluation.
+
+Here is an example:
+
+.. code-block:: python
+
+   def fun(x):
+       h, y = first_layer(x)
+       if y > 0:  # An evaluation is done here!
+           z  = second_layer_a(h)
+       else:
+           z  = second_layer_b(h)
+       return z
+
+Using arrays for control flow should be done with care. The above example works
+and can even be used with gradient transformations. However, this can be very
+inefficient if evaluations are done too frequently.

docs/src/usage/numpy.rst

@@ -62,6 +62,11 @@ even though no in-place operations on MLX memory are executed.
 PyTorch
 -------
 
+.. warning:: 
+
+   PyTorch Support for :obj:`memoryview` is experimental and can break for
+   multi-dimensional arrays. Casting to NumPy first is advised for now.
+
 PyTorch supports the buffer protocol, but it requires an explicit :obj:`memoryview`.
 
 .. code-block:: python

docs/src/usage/quick_start.rst

@@ -40,6 +40,9 @@ automatically evaluate the array.
   >> np.array(c)   # Also evaluates c
   array([2., 4., 6., 8.], dtype=float32)
 
+
+See the page on :ref:`Lazy Evaluation <lazy eval>` for more details.
+
 Function and Graph Transformations
 ----------------------------------
 

docs/src/usage/saving_and_loading.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
+.. _saving_and_loading:
+
+Saving and Loading Arrays
+=========================
+
+.. currentmodule:: mlx.core
+
+MLX supports multiple array serialization formats.
+
+.. list-table:: Serialization Formats
+   :widths: 20 8 25 25 
+   :header-rows: 1
+
+   * - Format 
+     - Extension 
+     - Function
+     - Notes 
+   * - NumPy 
+     - ``.npy`` 
+     - :func:`save`
+     - Single arrays only
+   * - NumPy archive 
+     - ``.npz`` 
+     - :func:`savez` and :func:`savez_compressed`
+     - Multiple arrays 
+   * - Safetensors
+     - ``.safetensors`` 
+     - :func:`save_safetensors`
+     - Multiple arrays 
+   * - GGUF 
+     - ``.gguf`` 
+     - :func:`save_gguf`
+     - Multiple arrays
+
+The :func:`load` function will load any of the supported serialization
+formats. It determines the format from the extensions. The output of
+:func:`load` depends on the format. 
+
+Here's an example of saving a single array to a file:
+
+.. code-block:: shell
+
+   >>> a = mx.array([1.0])
+   >>> mx.save("array", a)
+
+The array ``a`` will be saved in the file ``array.npy`` (notice the extension
+is automatically added). Including the extension is optional; if it is missing
+it will be added. You can load the array with:
+
+.. code-block:: shell
+
+   >>> mx.load("array.npy", a)
+   array([1], dtype=float32)
+
+Here's an example of saving several arrays to a single file:
+
+.. code-block:: shell
+
+   >>> a = mx.array([1.0])
+   >>> b = mx.array([2.0])
+   >>> mx.savez("arrays", a, b=b)
+
+For compatibility with :func:`numpy.savez` the MLX :func:`savez` takes arrays
+as arguments. If the keywords are missing, then default names will be
+provided. This can be loaded with:
+
+.. code-block:: shell
+
+   >>> mx.load("arrays.npz")
+   {'b': array([2], dtype=float32), 'arr_0': array([1], dtype=float32)}
+
+In this case :func:`load` returns a dictionary of names to arrays.
+
+The functions :func:`save_safetensors` and :func:`save_gguf` are similar to
+:func:`savez`, but they take as input a :obj:`dict` of string names to arrays:
+
+.. code-block:: shell
+
+   >>> a = mx.array([1.0])
+   >>> b = mx.array([2.0])
+   >>> mx.save_safetensors("arrays", {"a": a, "b": b})