[Cython] Cython compatibility thread on PyPy mailing list
Hi, just wanted to point you to a thread that currently runs on the PyPy-dev mailing list about how Cython and PyPy could improve their interoperability. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.pypy/9437/focus=9452 Stefan ___ cython-devel mailing list cython-devel@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
Re: [Cython] 0.16 release
On 14 February 2012 07:07, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Vitja Makarov > wrote: >> 2012/2/12 Vitja Makarov : >>> 2012/2/11 Robert Bradshaw : 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. > 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. 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... > - Robert > ___ > 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
Re: [Cython] 0.16 release
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:49 AM, mark florisson wrote: > On 14 February 2012 07:07, Robert Bradshaw > wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Vitja Makarov >> wrote: >>> 2012/2/12 Vitja Makarov : 2012/2/11 Robert Bradshaw : > 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! > 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. - Robert ___ cython-devel mailing list cython-devel@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
Re: [Cython] 0.16 release
On 14 February 2012 17:19, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:49 AM, mark florisson > wrote: >> On 14 February 2012 07:07, Robert Bradshaw >> wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Vitja Makarov >>> wrote: 2012/2/12 Vitja Makarov : > 2012/2/11 Robert Bradshaw : >> 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. > - Robert > ___ > 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
Re: [Cython] 0.16 release
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:09 PM, mark florisson wrote: > On 14 February 2012 17:19, Robert Bradshaw > wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:49 AM, mark florisson >> wrote: >>> On 14 February 2012 07:07, Robert Bradshaw >>> wrote: On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote: > 2012/2/12 Vitja Makarov : >> 2012/2/11 Robert Bradshaw : >>> 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
