On 05.07.2014 19:11, David Cournapeau wrote: > On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 1:55 AM, Julian Taylor > <jtaylor.deb...@googlemail.com <mailto:jtaylor.deb...@googlemail.com>> > wrote: > > On 05.07.2014 18:40, David Cournapeau wrote: > > The efforts are on average less demanding than this discussion. We are > > talking about adding entries to a list in most cases... > > > > Also, while adding the optimization support for bento, I've > noticed that > > a lot of the related distutils code is broken, and does not work as > > expected on at least OS X + clang. > > It just spits out a lot of warnings but they are harmless. > > > Adding lots of warnings are not harmless as they render the compiler > warning system near useless (too many false alarms). >
true but until now we haven't received a single complaint nor fixes so probably not many developers are actually using macs/clang to work on numpy C code. But I do agree its bad and I have fixing that on my todo list, I didn't get around to it yet. > I will fix the checks for both distutils and bento (using the autoconf > macros setup, which should be more reliable than what we use for builtin > and __attribute__-related checks) > > David > > > We could remove them by using with -Werror=attribute for the conftests > if it really bothers someone. > Or do you mean something else? > > > > > David > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com > <mailto:n...@pobox.com> > > <mailto:n...@pobox.com <mailto:n...@pobox.com>>> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 3:21 PM, David Cournapeau > <courn...@gmail.com <mailto:courn...@gmail.com> > > <mailto:courn...@gmail.com <mailto:courn...@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 11:17 PM, Nathaniel Smith > <n...@pobox.com <mailto:n...@pobox.com> > > <mailto:n...@pobox.com <mailto:n...@pobox.com>>> wrote: > > >> > > >> Maybe bento will revive and take over the new python > packaging world! > > >> Maybe not. Maybe something else will. I don't see how our > support for > > >> it will really affect these outcomes in any way. And I > especially > > >> don't see why it's important to spend time *now* on keeping > bento > > >> working, just in case it becomes useful *later*. > > > > > > But it is working right now, so that argument is moot. > > > > My suggestion was that we should drop the rule that a patch has to > > keep bento working to be merged. We're talking about future > breakages > > and future effort. The fact that it's working now doesn't say > anything > > about whether it's worth continuing to invest time in it. > > > > -- > > Nathaniel J. Smith > > Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh > > http://vorpus.org > > _______________________________________________ > > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org <mailto:NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org> > <mailto:NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org <mailto:NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org>> > > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org <mailto:NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org> > > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > > > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org <mailto:NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org> > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > > > > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
