On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> > Any chance we can tag the official 0.17 release in Github as well?
>> BTW, do we use lightweight tags or annotated tags in git? And why?
>
> you should use annotated -a (and/or signed -s,
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> > Any chance we can tag the official 0.17 release in Github as well?
> BTW, do we use lightweight tags or annotated tags in git? And why?
you should use annotated -a (and/or signed -s, which are annotated) tags
you do not use annotated tags:
$> git de
Bradley M. Froehle, 11.09.2012 00:34:
> Any chance we can tag the official 0.17 release in Github as well?
BTW, do we use lightweight tags or annotated tags in git? And why?
Stefan
___
cython-devel mailing list
cython-devel@python.org
http://mail.pytho
On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko
wrote:
>
> On Sat, 01 Sep 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> Release notes: http://wiki.cython.org/ReleaseNotes-0.17
>
> http://wiki.cython.org/ReleaseHistory
> references only 0.16 for me
> ;-)
Fixed.
___
On Sat, 01 Sep 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Release notes: http://wiki.cython.org/ReleaseNotes-0.17
http://wiki.cython.org/ReleaseHistory
references only 0.16 for me
;-)
--
Yaroslav O. Halchenko
Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences
Dartmouth College, 419 Moore H
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> First, congratulations and thanks for keeping such an important
> project moving forward!!
>
> On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 12:17 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>
>> What about making a 0.17 branch, on which we can do 0.17.1, etc. if
>> necessary. I
First, congratulations and thanks for keeping such an important
project moving forward!!
On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 12:17 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>
> What about making a 0.17 branch, on which we can do 0.17.1, etc. if
> necessary. I don't think we're to the point of needing to backport our
> bugfi
Any chance we can tag the official 0.17 release in Github as well?
-Brad
On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 12:40 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw, 02.09.2012 09:17:
>> On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> Robert Bradshaw, 02.09.2012 06:05:
I know this was brought up a co
This issue came up earlier today. Everything works fine for me with
gcc 4.6.1 and Cython 0.17, but maybe there is a bug being hit in gcc
4.6. Any debugging help would be appreciated (since this affects EC2
AMIs...)
http://github.com/pydata/pandas/issues/1880
thanks,
Wes
If a builtin type that differs between Python 2 and 3 (e.g., unicode)
is imported, then malformed C code is emitted by Cython-0.17: there is
an extraneous, unbalanced #if.
Here's a small reproducer:
shell$ cat foo.pyx
cdef extern from "Python.h":
ctypedef class __builtin__.
Robert Bradshaw, 02.09.2012 09:17:
> On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> Robert Bradshaw, 02.09.2012 06:05:
>>> I know this was brought up a couple of months ago, but we seem to be
>>> falling into a pattern of thinking about doing a bugfix release, then
>>> saying a full relea
On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw, 02.09.2012 06:05:
>> Is there a plan to announce more broadly? (E.g. python-announce, if
>> you haven't already (moderation adds a bit of latency).)
>
> I had already sent it to the python-announce list and also made an
> ann
Robert Bradshaw, 02.09.2012 06:05:
> Is there a plan to announce more broadly? (E.g. python-announce, if
> you haven't already (moderation adds a bit of latency).)
I had already sent it to the python-announce list and also made an
announcement on c.l.py now. :)
> I know this was brought up a cou
ud to announce the final
> release of Cython 0.17.
>
> This is another major step forward in the development of the language that
> will make life easier for a lot of users, rounds up some rough edges of the
> compiler and adds (preliminary) support for CPython 3.3 and PyPy. It
Hello everyone,
on behalf of the Cython project team, I'm proud to announce the final
release of Cython 0.17.
This is another major step forward in the development of the language that
will make life easier for a lot of users, rounds up some rough edges of the
compiler and adds (prelim
Hello everyone,
on behalf of the Cython project team, I'm proud to announce the release of
our fourth beta of Cython 0.17. Unless something truly unforseen happens,
this will become our final release. So please give it another test run
against your code.
Cython 0.17 is another major step fo
On 29 August 2012 21:20, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Christoph Gohlke, 27.08.2012 18:05:
>> On 8/27/2012 2:42 AM, mark florisson wrote:
>>> On 27 August 2012 01:39, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
On my system, the following patch fixes all the lastprivate related test
errors and does not have any si
Christoph Gohlke, 27.08.2012 18:05:
> On 8/27/2012 2:42 AM, mark florisson wrote:
>> On 27 August 2012 01:39, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>>> On my system, the following patch fixes all the lastprivate related test
>>> errors and does not have any side effects on other tests. It removes the
>>> additio
Neal Becker, 28.08.2012 18:42:
> Neal Becker wrote:
>
>> All built/tested OK on fedora (devel).
>>
>> Build log is here:
>> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8252/4428252/build.log
>>
>> Should I be concerened about these excluded tests?
>>
>> Ran 6865 tests in 1601.636s
>> OK
>> Follo
On 8/27/2012 2:42 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 27 August 2012 01:39, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
On 8/26/2012 4:08 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 25 August 2012 03:07, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
Hi,
On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi,
thanks for testing!
Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2
On 27 August 2012 01:39, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
> On 8/26/2012 4:08 AM, mark florisson wrote:
>>
>> On 25 August 2012 03:07, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi,
thanks for testing!
Christoph Gohlke, 24
Yaroslav Halchenko, 27.08.2012 03:38:
> FWIW -- this beta builds/tests ok across nearly all Debian ports but 4
Nice! Thanks for testing.
> where process unexpectedly terminates for no obvious reason (it
> built/tested just fine on my local sparc box):
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.p
) on those intriguing
ports.
On Thu, 23 Aug 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> on behalf of the Cython project team, I'm proud to announce the release of
> our third beta of Cython 0.17. This is our first and hopefully last release
> candidate for 0.17, another majo
On 8/26/2012 4:08 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 25 August 2012 03:07, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
Hi,
On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi,
thanks for testing!
Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
I tested Cython-0.17b3 on Windows 7 with Visual Studio compilers.
32 bit Python 2.7 w
On 26 August 2012 22:25, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
> On 8/26/2012 2:09 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>>
>> On 8/26/2012 4:08 AM, mark florisson wrote:
>>>
>>> On 25 August 2012 03:07, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
Hi,
On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>
>
> Hi
On 26 August 2012 22:45, mark florisson wrote:
> On 26 August 2012 22:25, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>> On 8/26/2012 2:09 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>>>
>>> On 8/26/2012 4:08 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 25 August 2012 03:07, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> On 8
On 8/26/2012 2:09 PM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
On 8/26/2012 4:08 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 25 August 2012 03:07, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
Hi,
On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi,
thanks for testing!
Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
I tested Cython-0.17b3 on Windows 7 wit
On 8/26/2012 4:08 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 25 August 2012 03:07, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
Hi,
On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi,
thanks for testing!
Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
I tested Cython-0.17b3 on Windows 7 with Visual Studio compilers.
32 bit Python 2.7 w
On 8/26/2012 11:08 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 26 August 2012 17:32, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
On 8/26/2012 4:08 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 25 August 2012 03:07, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
Hi,
On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi,
thanks for testing!
Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.
On 26 August 2012 17:32, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
> On 8/26/2012 4:08 AM, mark florisson wrote:
>>
>> On 25 August 2012 03:07, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi,
thanks for testing!
Christoph Gohlke, 24
Christoph Gohlke, 26.08.2012 17:54:
> On 8/26/2012 2:41 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> A patch would essentially look like this:
>>
>> diff -r 18fed0dec20e Cython/Compiler/Code.py
>> --- a/Cython/Compiler/Code.py Sun Aug 26 00:54:01 2012 +0200
>> +++ b/Cython/Compiler/Code.py Sun Aug 26 11:39:29 2
On 8/26/2012 4:08 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 25 August 2012 03:07, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
Hi,
On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi,
thanks for testing!
Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
I tested Cython-0.17b3 on Windows 7 with Visual Studio compilers.
32 bit Python 2.7 w
On 8/26/2012 2:41 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Stefan Behnel, 26.08.2012 11:36:
Christoph Gohlke, 26.08.2012 10:03:
On 8/25/2012 6:51 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Christoph Gohlke, 25.08.2012 04:07:
On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
On 64 bit Python 2.7
On 25 August 2012 03:07, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> thanks for testing!
>>
>> Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
>>>
>>> I tested Cython-0.17b3 on Windows 7 with Visual Studio compilers.
>>>
>>> 32 bit Python 2.7 works well, onl
Stefan Behnel, 26.08.2012 11:36:
> Christoph Gohlke, 26.08.2012 10:03:
>> On 8/25/2012 6:51 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> Christoph Gohlke, 25.08.2012 04:07:
On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
>> On 64 bit Python 2.7 and 3.2 with msvc9 comp
Christoph Gohlke, 26.08.2012 10:03:
> On 8/25/2012 6:51 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> Christoph Gohlke, 25.08.2012 04:07:
>>> On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
> On 64 bit Python 2.7 and 3.2 with msvc9 compiler, python.exe crashes
> during
>>
On 8/25/2012 6:51 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Christoph Gohlke, 25.08.2012 04:07:
On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
I tested Cython-0.17b3 on Windows 7 with Visual Studio compilers.
32 bit Python 2.7 works well, only 4 test failures.
Three of those
Christoph Gohlke, 25.08.2012 04:07:
> On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
>>> I tested Cython-0.17b3 on Windows 7 with Visual Studio compilers.
>>>
>>> 32 bit Python 2.7 works well, only 4 test failures.
>>
>> Three of those errors are in OpenMP tests
Hi,
On 8/24/2012 12:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi,
thanks for testing!
Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
I tested Cython-0.17b3 on Windows 7 with Visual Studio compilers.
32 bit Python 2.7 works well, only 4 test failures.
Three of those errors are in OpenMP tests - is OpenMP supported
Hi,
thanks for testing!
Christoph Gohlke, 24.08.2012 07:20:
> I tested Cython-0.17b3 on Windows 7 with Visual Studio compilers.
>
> 32 bit Python 2.7 works well, only 4 test failures.
Three of those errors are in OpenMP tests - is OpenMP supported in your
build environment?
The other one is th
On 8/23/2012 11:13 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hello everyone,
on behalf of the Cython project team, I'm proud to announce the release of
our third beta of Cython 0.17. This is our first and hopefully last release
candidate for 0.17, another major step forward in the development of the
lan
Yaroslav Halchenko, 23.08.2012 21:23:
> my not so wild but still a guess that 0.17b3 corresponds to
> 5b0e8f8b96e353ac6d12d54f86babee9ff6f1bf8 git commit (never know for sure
> if there is no tag :-P )? ;)
http://wiki.cython.org/ReleaseNotes-0.17
hg-git isn't all that good at mirroring tags back
to announce the release of
> our third beta of Cython 0.17. This is our first and hopefully last release
> candidate for 0.17, another major step forward in the development of the
> language that will make life easier for a lot of users, rounds up some
> rough edges of the compile
Hello everyone,
on behalf of the Cython project team, I'm proud to announce the release of
our third beta of Cython 0.17. This is our first and hopefully last release
candidate for 0.17, another major step forward in the development of the
language that will make life easier for a lot of
Hello everyone,
on behalf of the Cython project team, I'm proud to announce the release of
our second beta of Cython 0.17. This is another major step forward in the
development of the language that will make life easier for a lot of users,
rounds up some rough edges of the compiler and
Yaroslav Halchenko, 02.08.2012 21:54:
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> just a side-note -- I didn't know that StrictVersion doesn't play nicely
>>> with LooseVersion to any degree:
>
>>> $> python -c 'from distutils.version import LooseVersion as LV,
>>> StrictVersion as SV; print
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> > just a side-note -- I didn't know that StrictVersion doesn't play nicely
> > with LooseVersion to any degree:
> > $> python -c 'from distutils.version import LooseVersion as LV,
> > StrictVersion as SV; print SV("0.17") > LV("0.18")'
> > True
> >
Yaroslav Halchenko, 02.08.2012 19:02:
> just a side-note -- I didn't know that StrictVersion doesn't play nicely with
> LooseVersion to any degree:
>
> $> python -c 'from distutils.version import LooseVersion as LV, StrictVersion
> as SV; print SV("0.17") > LV("0.18")'
> True
>
> at least in p
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Bradley M. Froehle, 01.08.2012 18:35:
> > Yes, this versioning has also impacted mpi4py which had to add some pretty
> > ugly code in setup.py to work around it:
> > https://code.google.com/p/mpi4py/source/detail?r=841e9df
> >> I am not sure what is
Bradley M. Froehle, 01.08.2012 18:35:
> Yes, this versioning has also impacted mpi4py which had to add some pretty
> ugly code in setup.py to work around it:
>
> https://code.google.com/p/mpi4py/source/detail?r=841e9df
>
>> I am not sure what is the status on PEP 386 [1] (not yet adopted afaik)
On Wed, 01 Aug 2012, mark florisson wrote:
> Thanks for the fix. I also pushed a fix for one more test numpy_test
> related to fused types dispatching. That passes all tests for me on 32
> bit linux.
> > Yaroslav, could you give it a try on the Debian build servers?
FWIW -- 0.16rc1-550-g8880c78
o the work of Yaroslav Halchenko, there is an experimental Debian
>>>>> package for Cython 0.17.beta1 --
>>>>> http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/cython.html
>>>>>
>>>>> However, the builds are showing a lot of test failures on non-amd64
>>>
Yes, this versioning has also impacted mpi4py which had to add some pretty ugly
code in setup.py to work around it:
https://code.google.com/p/mpi4py/source/detail?r=841e9df
-Brad
> NB I am not sure what is the status on PEP 386 [1] (not yet adopted
> afaik) but it might be worthwhile following i
minor note -- could someone push the tag (annotated or signed
preferably) for 0.17rc1?
NB I am not sure what is the status on PEP 386 [1] (not yet adopted
afaik) but it might be worthwhile following it and/or existing
disutils.version.StrictVersion since having
In [2]: Cython.__version__
Out[2]:
x-sid)yoh@zelenka:~/cython/cython$ OPT="-g -O0" /usr/bin/python
> runtests.py -vv memoryview_compare_type_pointers --no-cleanup
> Python 2.7.3 (default, Jul 14 2012, 05:19:55)
> [GCC 4.6.3]
> Running tests against Cython 0.17.beta1
> 68811fa9946e4253ad405ba3011512a32807bc
thon 2.7.3 (default, Jul 14 2012, 05:19:55)
[GCC 4.6.3]
Running tests against Cython 0.17.beta1 68811fa9946e4253ad405ba3011512a32807bc7b
Backends: c,cpp
runTest (__main__.EndToEndTest)
End-to-end memoryview_compare_type_pointers ... ok
--
Robert Bradshaw, 31.07.2012 19:24:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> mark florisson, 28.07.2012 14:04:
>>> On 27 July 2012 23:30, Bradley Froehle wrote:
>>>> Thanks to the work of Yaroslav Halchenko, there is an experimental Debian
>
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 28.07.2012 14:04:
>> On 27 July 2012 23:30, Bradley Froehle wrote:
>>> Thanks to the work of Yaroslav Halchenko, there is an experimental Debian
>>> package for Cython 0.17.beta1 -- http://packages.
mark florisson, 28.07.2012 14:04:
> On 27 July 2012 23:30, Bradley Froehle wrote:
>> Thanks to the work of Yaroslav Halchenko, there is an experimental Debian
>> package for Cython 0.17.beta1 -- http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/cython.html
>>
>> However, the build
On 27 July 2012 23:30, Bradley Froehle wrote:
> Thanks to the work of Yaroslav Halchenko, there is an experimental Debian
> package for Cython 0.17.beta1 -- http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/cython.html
>
> However, the builds are showing a lot of test failures on non-amd64 sytems.
Stefan Behnel, 23.07.2012 22:45:
> I'm expecting at least one release candidate to follow on this beta
> version, and a final release in early August. Please give this beta release
> as much testing as you can, so that we can quickly advance towards the
> final release.
Any comments from Windows u
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> > ultimate suffix under assumption that it would not change (also removed
> > unused
> > _code_cache) (it came out a bit longer simply due to me adding helper
> > function
> > _get_build_extension() to avoid duplication):
> Looks good. Thanks. File
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>
>> > module = imp.load_dynamic(module_name, module_path)
>> > arg_list = [kwds[arg] for arg in arg_names]
>
>> Compiled modules can persist between sessions as well.
>
> yeah -- f
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> > module = imp.load_dynamic(module_name, module_path)
> > arg_list = [kwds[arg] for arg in arg_names]
> Compiled modules can persist between sessions as well.
yeah -- figured it down also while working on another version of this
trivial pa
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko
wrote:
> actually I have not stated alternative variant since I thought it would
> not be wise to 'waste' memory : just store association between a
> particular build and target module_name but now I have mentioned that
> such code is pretty muc
actually I have not stated alternative variant since I thought it would
not be wise to 'waste' memory : just store association between a
particular build and target module_name but now I have mentioned that
such code is pretty much there ... but incorrect and not used:
$> grep -e '\Wkey\W' -e '^d
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> One essential feature of cython.inline(...) is that if the code has
> already been compiled (and loaded) it should return very fast. This
> would seem to add significant overhead.
that is what was my concern also with such an approach... I am not s
Thanks for the report!
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko
wrote:
> So I wonder, wouldn't it be reasonable (i.e. more robust) in cython_inline to
> instantiate first build_extension and seek full name for the resultant
> extension from it? That should eliminate any possibility
NB Sorry for a lengthy reply -- more like notes for myself I guess ;)
Short story -- imp.get_suffixes()[0] != get_config_var('SO')
on Debian multiarch sid
Perspective patch is at the bottom.
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> > anything familiar? (I see PY3 fix bf7981fb37b19f08a
Yaroslav Halchenko, 25.07.2012 18:50:
> Congrats on the beta-release! While testing an updated debian package
> for cython I have ran into failures with Python 3.2.3 (default, Jul 13 2012,
> 21:02:37) [GCC 4.7.1] (complete log:
> http://neuro.debian.net/_files/_buildlogs/cytho
Congrats on the beta-release! While testing an updated debian package
for cython I have ran into failures with Python 3.2.3 (default, Jul 13 2012,
21:02:37) [GCC 4.7.1] (complete log:
http://neuro.debian.net/_files/_buildlogs/cython/0.17~beta1/cython_0.17~beta1-1_amd64.build)
anything familiar
Hello everyone,
on behalf of the Cython project team, I'm proud to announce the release of
our first beta of Cython 0.17. This is another major step forward in the
development of the language that will make life easier for a lot of users,
rounds up some rough edges of the compiler and
Hey,
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:35 PM, mark florisson
wrote:
> Hey Matthew,
>
> Seriously, no problem, we're still getting stuff in there, no need to
> hurry. If you're in Cuba it sounds like you have better stuff to do
> than improve Cython's documentation :) Not to discourage contributors,
> but
Hey Matthew,
Seriously, no problem, we're still getting stuff in there, no need to
hurry. If you're in Cuba it sounds like you have better stuff to do
than improve Cython's documentation :) Not to discourage contributors,
but I would really enjoy Cuba here :). I'm working on my gsoc now, so
making
Pushed my change.
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:03 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 23 May 2012 12:31, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:08 AM, mark florisson
>> wrote:
>>> On 6 May 2012 15:28, mark florisson wrote:
Hey,
I think we already have quite a bit of functi
Hi,
For the promised memoryview doc edits:
Sorry - I'm in Cuba - not much internet. I will push something for
review by Friday, but please go ahead without me if that's not fast
enough. Sorry to be the blocker,
Best,
Matthew
On 5/23/12, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For the promised memor
Hi,
For the promised memoryview doc edits:
Sorry - I'm in Cuba - not much internet. I will push something for
review by Friday, but please go ahead without me if that's not fast
enough. Sorry to be the blocker,
Best,
Matthew
On 5/23/12, mark florisson wrote:
> On 23 May 2012 12:31, Robert
On 23 May 2012 12:31, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:08 AM, mark florisson
> wrote:
>> On 6 May 2012 15:28, mark florisson wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will b
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:08 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 6 May 2012 15:28, mark florisson wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>> for a 0.17 release? I think it would b
On 6 May 2012 15:28, mark florisson wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
> extent pypy support works, wh
mark florisson, 06.05.2012 16:28:
> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
> extent pypy support works, what works and what d
Stefan Behnel, 06.05.2012 20:22:
> Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 06.05.2012 19:51:
>> On 05/06/2012 04:28 PM, mark florisson wrote:
>>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>>> for a 0.17 release? I th
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 07.05.2012 18:19:
>> On 7 May 2012 17:04, Vitja Makarov wrote:
>>> Hmm, it seems to me that master is currently broken:
>>>
>>> https://sage.math.washington.edu:8091/hudson/job/cython-devel-tests/BACKEND=c,PYVERSION=py27-ext/
mark florisson, 07.05.2012 18:19:
> On 7 May 2012 17:04, Vitja Makarov wrote:
>> Hmm, it seems to me that master is currently broken:
>>
>> https://sage.math.washington.edu:8091/hudson/job/cython-devel-tests/BACKEND=c,PYVERSION=py27-ext/
>>
> Quite broken, in fact :) It doesn't ever print error mes
On 7 May 2012 17:04, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2012/5/7 mark florisson :
>> On 6 May 2012 20:41, Matthew Brett wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 7:28 AM, mark florisson
>>> wrote:
Hey,
I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
after merging
2012/5/7 mark florisson :
> On 6 May 2012 20:41, Matthew Brett wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 7:28 AM, mark florisson
>> wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good ti
On 6 May 2012 20:41, Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 7:28 AM, mark florisson
> wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>> for a 0.17 release? I think it
Hi,
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 7:28 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
> extent pypy s
On 6 May 2012 19:38, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 06.05.2012 16:28:
>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
>>
On 6 May 2012 19:29, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2012/5/6 Dag Sverre Seljebotn :
>> On 05/06/2012 04:28 PM, mark florisson wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>>> for a
mark florisson, 06.05.2012 16:28:
> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
> extent pypy support works, what works and what d
2012/5/6 Dag Sverre Seljebotn :
> On 05/06/2012 04:28 PM, mark florisson wrote:
>>
>> Hey,
>>
>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also docu
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 06.05.2012 19:51:
> On 05/06/2012 04:28 PM, mark florisson wrote:
>> I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
>> after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
>> for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document t
On 05/06/2012 04:28 PM, mark florisson wrote:
Hey,
I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
extent pypy support works, what work
Hey,
I think we already have quite a bit of functionality (nearly) ready,
after merging some pending pull requests maybe it will be a good time
for a 0.17 release? I think it would be good to also document to what
extent pypy support works, what works and what doesn't. Stefan, since
you added a la
95 matches
Mail list logo
