On 23 February 2012 08:30, Vitja Makarov <vitja.maka...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2012/2/20 Vitja Makarov <vitja.maka...@gmail.com>: >> 2012/2/20 mark florisson <markflorisso...@gmail.com>: >>> On 19 February 2012 10:16, Vitja Makarov <vitja.maka...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> 2012/2/15 mark florisson <markflorisso...@gmail.com>: >>>>> On 15 February 2012 15:45, mark florisson <markflorisso...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> On 14 February 2012 21:33, Robert Bradshaw >>>>>> <rober...@math.washington.edu> wrote: >>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:09 PM, mark florisson >>>>>>> <markflorisso...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 14 February 2012 17:19, Robert Bradshaw >>>>>>>> <rober...@math.washington.edu> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:49 AM, mark florisson >>>>>>>>> <markflorisso...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 14 February 2012 07:07, Robert Bradshaw >>>>>>>>>> <rober...@math.washington.edu> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Vitja Makarov >>>>>>>>>>> <vitja.maka...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> 2012/2/12 Vitja Makarov <vitja.maka...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2012/2/11 Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> All of Sage passes except for one test: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sage -t devel/sage/sage/misc/sageinspect.py >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ********************************************************************** >>>>>>>>>>>>>> File >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "/levi/scratch/robertwb/hudson/sage-4.8/devel/sage-main/sage/misc/sageinspect.py", >>>>>>>>>>>>>> line 970: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sage: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sage_getargspec(bernstein_polynomial_factory_ratlist.coeffs_bitsize) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Expected: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ArgSpec(args=['self'], varargs=None, keywords=None, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> defaults=None) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Got: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ArgSpec(args=['self'], varargs=None, keywords=None, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> defaults=()) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ********************************************************************** >>>>>>>>>>>>>> File >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "/levi/scratch/robertwb/hudson/sage-4.8/devel/sage-main/sage/misc/sageinspect.py", >>>>>>>>>>>>>> line 973: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sage: sage_getargspec(BooleanMonomialMonoid.gen) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Expected: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ArgSpec(args=['self', 'i'], varargs=None, keywords=None, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> defaults=(0,)) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Got: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ArgSpec(args=['self', 'i'], varargs=None, keywords=None, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> defaults=()) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ********************************************************************** >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 items had failures: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 of 31 in __main__.example_21 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ***Test Failed*** 2 failures. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any ideas why this would have changed? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> CyFunction now provides its own code object. So inspect.getargs() >>>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>>> called instead of >>>>>>>>>>>>> inspect.ArgSpec(*_sage_getargspec_cython(sage_getsource(obj))). It >>>>>>>>>>>>> seems like func.func_defaults should be implemented. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I've created a pull request: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/cython/cython/pull/88 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! The only other thing I can think of was a question of using >>>>>>>>>>> caching to mitigate the longer compile times, but I can't remember >>>>>>>>>>> if >>>>>>>>>>> this was resolved. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The compiler has like 2 or 3 seconds of constant overhead if you use >>>>>>>>>> memoryviews. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That'd be nice to cut down, but certainly not a blocker. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> As I'm going to be MIA any day now, someone else should take up the >>>>>>>>>>> banner to push this long awaited release. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "Missing in action"? Are you planning to desert? :) I can't find any >>>>>>>>>> relevant abbreviation, but I think I know what it means, >>>>>>>>>> congratulations in advance. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Twin boys coming any day now! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And the Cython team just keeps on growing! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Stefan, you have been involved the longest, would you feel up to the >>>>>>>>>> task? You probably have the best understanding and experience with >>>>>>>>>> any >>>>>>>>>> issues (no pressure :). Otherwise I could have a try... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It's pretty easy. Once the defaults change is in it's probably worth >>>>>>>>> cutting a beta or release candidate to email to dev/users, and if >>>>>>>>> there's no blocking feedback you go ahead and push it out (basically >>>>>>>>> writing up the release notes on the wiki, cleaning up trac, tagging >>>>>>>>> the repository, making sure everything we care about on hudson is >>>>>>>>> still passing, uploading to pypi and the website (the sdist tarball), >>>>>>>>> emailing our lists and python-announce, re-building and updating the >>>>>>>>> pointer to the documentation, ...) If it goes on for a while it's >>>>>>>>> worth making/using a release branch on github. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for the summary, I'm sure I would have missed one or two :) Ok, >>>>>>>> I'll volunteer then. Maybe I can create a beta somewhere next week and >>>>>>>> then we can see the community tear it apart. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Robert >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> cython-devel mailing list >>>>>>> cython-devel@python.org >>>>>>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, my previous email with attachment bounced. Here goes. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm getting a substantial amount of failing tests on MSVC, >>>>>> https://gist.github.com/1836766. I think most complex number tests are >>>>>> failing because they cast >>>>>> a struct of a certain type to itself like ((struct_A) my_struct_A), >>>>>> which MSVC doesn't allow. >>>>>> >>>>>> Some tests seem to fail because they can't be imported: "compiling (c) >>>>>> and running numpy_parallel: ImportError: No module named >>>>>> numpy_parallel". >>>>>> >>>>>> And then there is a huge number of permission errors: WindowsError: >>>>>> [Error 5] Access is denied: >>>>>> 'c:\\Users\\mark\\cython\\BUILD\\compile\\cpp\\libc_math.pyd' . Maybe >>>>>> something is broken in the test runner (or in my setup somehow)? >>>>> >>>>> The pasted output is a little munged because it was redirected to a >>>>> log (and stdout is probably block buffering, something we could also >>>>> fix to line buffering). >>>> >>>> I've merged cydefaults branch and now sage-tests is blue. >>> >>> So, if the defaults are literals you build a tuple and set them on the >>> function, but if they are not literals you save everything in a struct >>> and use a callback that builds a tuple from the elements of that >>> struct, correct? Why can't you always just build a tuple, i.e., why do >>> you need the callback to build the tuple? >>> >> >> So if defaults are literals const tuple is created once at constant >> initialization. Since CyFunction.defaults are already there (remember >> http://trac.cython.org/cython_trac/ticket/674) I've decided to avoid >> defaults tuple initialization at function create time. Instead I've >> introduced constructor (defaults_getter) it's run only once and caches >> result in CyFunction.defaults_tuple. >> >> ps: We should wait with release until pyregr tests issue is solved. >> > > We can also fix this ticket before release > http://trac.cython.org/cython_trac/ticket/761
Good idea. I think the ticket should read 'sys.path' instead of PYTHONPATH, though. > -- > vitja. > _______________________________________________ > cython-devel mailing list > cython-devel@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel _______________________________________________ cython-devel mailing list cython-devel@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
