On 02/14/2011 08:40 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
Hi!
In order to implement "reaching definitions" algorithm.
I'm now working on control-flow (or data-flow) graph.
Here is funny picture made with graphviz ;)
http://piccy.info/view3/1099337/ca29d7054d09bd0503cefa25f5f49420/1200/
Cool! This wi
On 02/15/2011 08:21 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
2011/2/15 Robert Bradshaw:
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
Hi!
In order to implement "reaching definitions" algorithm.
I'm now working on control-flo
On 02/17/2011 07:11 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
I'm working on a patch to get old, recent, and dev NumPy working in
2.7/3.x. So far, I had success, but I still have two failures like the
one pasted below.
Dag, could you elaborate a bit about the purpose of
__Pyx_BufFmt_CheckString() ? It is just
This has been raised earlier, but I don't think there was such a
demonstrative use-case as what I have now.
Fwrap is suppose to be able to wrap Fortran "modules", which is
essentially a namespace mechanism. It makes sense to convert the
namespace to Python by creating one Cython pyx file per F
On 03/02/2011 11:48 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 02.03.2011 11:20:
c) Somehow provide more than one module in the same compilation unit.
Again, this requires the build to work correctly, but seems less
dangerous,
and also has the advantage of *allowing* static linking of the
On 03/02/2011 04:11 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
On 2 March 2011 08:35, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 02.03.2011 11:54:
Problem is that Fortran code often has...interesting...programming
practices. Global variables abound, and are often initialised between
modules. Imagine
On 03/02/2011 05:01 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 02.03.2011 16:37:
On 03/02/2011 04:11 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
On 2 March 2011 08:35, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 02.03.2011 11:54:
Problem is that Fortran code often has...interesting...programming
practices
On 03/08/2011 11:34 AM, mark florisson wrote:
I'd like to implement OpenMP support for Cython. Looking at
Great news! It looks like this will be a topic on the coming workshop,
with Francesc coming as well (but nothing wrong with getting started
before then).
(And please speak up if you are
On 03/11/2011 08:20 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Robert Bradshaw, 11.03.2011 01:46:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Francesc Alted
wrote:
A Tuesday 08 March 2011 18:50:15 Stefan Behnel escrigué:
mark florisson, 08.03.2011 18:00:
What I meant was that the
wrapper returned by the decorator would
On 03/11/2011 12:37 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 11.03.2011 08:56:
Basically, I'm +1 to anything that can make me
pretend the GIL doesn't exist, even if it comes with a 2x performance
hit:
Because that will make me write parallell code (which I can't be
bot
On 03/16/2011 11:28 AM, mark florisson wrote:
I implemented the 'with gil:' statement, and have added error checking
for nested 'with gil' or 'with nogil' statements. For instance, with
the patch applied Cython wil issue an error when you have e.g.
with nogil:
with nogil:
...
(or
On 03/16/2011 12:54 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 16 March 2011 11:58, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 03/16/2011 11:28 AM, mark florisson wrote:
I implemented the 'with gil:' statement, and have added error checking
for nested 'with gil' or 'with nogil' statements
On 03/16/2011 01:55 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 16 March 2011 13:37, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 03/16/2011 12:54 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 16 March 2011 11:58, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 03/16/2011 11:28 AM, mark florisson wrote:
I implemented the 'with gil:' stat
On 03/16/2011 02:17 PM, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
Wed, 16 Mar 2011 14:10:29 +0100, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Ah, right. I guess I agree with disallowing nested "with nogil"
statements for the time being then.
Could you make the inner nested "with nogil" statements no-ops in
On 03/17/2011 12:24 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
Stefan Behnel wrote:
I'm not sure if this is a good idea. "nogil" blocks don't have a way
to handle exceptions, so simply jumping out of them because an inner
'with gil' block raised an exception can have unexpected side effects.
Seems to me that the
On 03/17/2011 08:38 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 03/17/2011 12:24 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
Stefan Behnel wrote:
I'm not sure if this is a good idea. "nogil" blocks don't have a way
to handle exceptions, so simply jumping out of them because an inner
'with gil&#
On 03/17/2011 09:27 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 17.03.2011 08:38:
On 03/17/2011 12:24 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
Stefan Behnel wrote:
I'm not sure if this is a good idea. "nogil" blocks don't have a
way to
handle exceptions, so simply jumping out of them bec
On 03/17/2011 11:16 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 17 March 2011 10:08, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
How about this compromise: We balk on the code you wrote with:
Error line 345: Exceptions propagating from "with gil" block cannot be
propagated out of function, please insert try/
On 03/18/2011 11:10 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
mark florisson, 18.03.2011 10:52:
On 18 March 2011 07:07, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Greg Ewing, 18.03.2011 01:18:
mark florisson wrote:
I think we could support it without having to acquire
the GIL in the finally clause.
That was the intention -- th
On 03/21/2011 11:45 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
Now error/warning messages are stored in global variables at
Cython.Compiler.Errors
I think it's much better to move error handling into some object,
Main.Context for example.
Some benefits:
- reduce use of global variables
- allow more then one
CEP up at http://wiki.cython.org/enhancements/prange
"""
This spec is the result of a number of discussions at Cython workshop 1.
Quite a few different ways of expressing parallelism was looked at, and
finally we decided to split the problem in two:
* A simple and friendly solution that cove
CEP up at http://wiki.cython.org/enhancements/prange
"""
This spec is the result of a number of discussions at Cython workshop 1.
Quite a few different ways of expressing parallelism was looked at, and
finally we decided to split the problem in two:
* A simple and friendly solution that cove
On 04/04/2011 11:43 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
CEP up at http://wiki.cython.org/enhancements/prange
"""
This spec is the result of a number of discussions at Cython workshop
1. Quite a few different ways of expressing parallelism was looked at,
and finally we decided to sp
On 04/04/2011 01:23 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 04.04.2011 12:17:
CEP up at http://wiki.cython.org/enhancements/prange
"""
Variable handling
Rather than explicit declaration of shared/private variables we rely
on conventions:
* Thread-shared: Variable
On 04/04/2011 03:04 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 04.04.2011 13:53:
On 04/04/2011 01:23 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 04.04.2011 12:17:
CEP up at http://wiki.cython.org/enhancements/prange
"""
Variable handling
Rather than explicit declar
On 04/04/2011 03:27 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
* A simple and friendly solution that covers, perhaps, 80% of the cases,
based on simply replacing range with prange.
This is a "merely" aesthetic objection, while remainin
On 04/04/2011 03:04 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
That's what I thought, yes. It looks unexpected, sure. That's the
clear advantage of using inner functions, which do not add anything
new at all. But if we want to add something that looks more like a
loop, we should at least make it behave like so
On 04/04/2011 05:22 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 April 2011 13:53, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/04/2011 01:23 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 04.04.2011 12:17:
CEP up at http://wiki.cython.org/enhancements/prange
"""
Variable handling
Rather than expli
On 04/04/2011 09:26 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 April 2011 19:18, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/04/2011 05:22 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 April 2011 13:53, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 04/04/2011 01:23 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 04.04.2011 12:17:
CEP up at
On 04/05/2011 07:05 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:04 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 04.04.2011 13:53:
On 04/04/2011 01:23 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 04.04.2011 12:17:
CEP up at http://wiki.cython.org/enhancements/prange
""
There's a (much shorter) proposal for a more explicit parallelism
construct at
http://wiki.cython.org/enhancements/parallelblock
This is a little more verbose for the simplest case, but makes the
medium-cases that needs work buffers much simpler, and is also more
explicit and difficult to get
On 04/05/2011 11:01 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
mark florisson, 05.04.2011 10:44:
On 5 April 2011 10:34, Stefan Behnel wrote:
mark florisson, 05.04.2011 10:26:
On 5 April 2011 09:21, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Justification for Cython-specific syntax: This is something that is
really
only
On 04/05/2011 04:53 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
mark florisson, 04.04.2011 21:26:
For clarity, I'll add an example:
def f(np.ndarray[double] x, double alpha):
cdef double s = 0
cdef double tmp = 2
cdef double other = 6.6
On 04/05/2011 04:58 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/05/2011 04:53 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Stefan Behnel
wrote:
mark florisson, 04.04.2011 21:26:
For clarity, I'll add an example:
def f(np.ndarray[double] x, double alpha):
cdef double
On 04/05/2011 05:26 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 04/05/2011 04:58 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/05/2011 04:53 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Stefan Behnel
wrote:
mark florisson, 04.04.2011 21
I've done a pretty major revision to the prange CEP, bringing in a lot
of the feedback.
Thread-private variables are now split in two cases:
i) The safe cases, which really require very little technical
knowledge -> automatically inferred
ii) As an advanced feature, unsafe cases that requi
On 04/05/2011 10:29 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
I've done a pretty major revision to the prange CEP, bringing in a lot
of the feedback.
Thread-private variables are now split in two cases:
i) The safe cases, which really require very little technical
knowledge -> automatically
I just wanted to make everybody aware that there's a paper on Cython in
this month's CiSE (http://cise.aip.org/).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2010.118 (paywall)
Researchers: Please consider citing this paper if Cython helps your
research in non-trivial ways.
Dag Sverre
___
On 04/07/2011 02:12 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Zak Stone wrote:
Researchers: Please consider citing this paper if Cython helps your
research in non-trivial ways.
Is this the canonical citation reference for Cython now? If so, can this be
mentioned on the Cython
I should have put up this right away, sorry:
http://folk.uio.no/dagss/cython_cise.pdf
It is actually post-review, so it contains most things but some
stylistic improvements and layout. Not sure about posting this on
cython.org, but we could perhaps link to my webpage
(http://folk.uio.no/dagss
On 04/07/2011 10:00 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 07.04.2011 07:54:
On 04/07/2011 02:12 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Zak Stone wrote:
Researchers: Please consider citing this paper if Cython helps your
research in non-trivial ways.
Is this the
On 04/07/2011 10:01 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 04/07/2011 02:12 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Zak Stonewrote:
Researchers: Please consider citing this paper if Cython helps your
research in non
On 04/07/2011 11:37 AM, René Rex wrote:
Any more keywords to add?
What about "Python"? ;)
Done and done. Thanks for the patches.
DS
___
cython-devel mailing list
cython-devel@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
On 04/07/2011 10:01 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 04/07/2011 02:12 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Zak Stonewrote:
Researchers: Please consider citing this paper if Cython helps your
research in non
On 04/07/2011 05:01 PM, Romain Guillebert wrote:
Hi
I proposed the Summer of Code project regarding the Python backend for
Cython.
As I said in my proposal this would translate Cython code to Python +
FFI code (I don't know yet if it will use ctypes or something specific
to PyPy). PyPy's ctypes
On 04/11/2011 10:45 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 5 April 2011 22:29, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
I've done a pretty major revision to the prange CEP, bringing in a lot of
the feedback.
Thread-private variables are now split in two cases:
i) The safe cases, which really require very l
On 04/11/2011 11:41 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 11 April 2011 11:10, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/11/2011 10:45 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 5 April 2011 22:29, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
I've done a pretty major revision to the prange CEP, bringing in a lot of
the fee
On 04/11/2011 12:14 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 11 April 2011 12:08, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/11/2011 11:41 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 11 April 2011 11:10, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 04/11/2011 10:45 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 5 April 2011 22:29, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
On 04/11/2011 01:02 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/11/2011 12:14 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 11 April 2011 12:08, Dag Sverre
Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/11/2011 11:41 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 11 April 2011 11:10, Dag Sverre
Seljebotn
wrote:
On 04/11/2011 10:45 AM, mark florisson
On 04/11/2011 01:12 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 11 April 2011 13:03, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/11/2011 01:02 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/11/2011 12:14 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 11 April 2011 12:08, Dag Sverre
Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/11/2011 11:41 AM, mark florisson
On 04/13/2011 09:31 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 5 April 2011 22:29, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
I've done a pretty major revision to the prange CEP, bringing in a lot of
the feedback.
Thread-private variables are now split in two cases:
i) The safe cases, which really require very l
On 04/13/2011 11:13 PM, mark florisson wrote:
Although there is omp_get_max_threads():
"The omp_get_max_threads routine returns an upper bound on the number
of threads that could be used to form a new team if a parallel region
without a num_threads clause were encountered after execution return
On 04/14/2011 08:39 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 14 April 2011 20:29, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/13/2011 11:13 PM, mark florisson wrote:
Although there is omp_get_max_threads():
"The omp_get_max_threads routine returns an upper bound on the number
of threads that could be us
On 04/14/2011 08:42 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 14 April 2011 20:29, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/13/2011 11:13 PM, mark florisson wrote:
Although there is omp_get_max_threads():
"The omp_get_max_threads routine returns an upper bound on the number
of threads that could be us
On 04/14/2011 09:08 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 14 April 2011 20:58, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/14/2011 08:42 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 14 April 2011 20:29, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 04/13/2011 11:13 PM, mark florisson wrote:
Although there is omp_get_max_threads
On 04/15/2011 06:45 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
On 15 April 2011 11:20, Yury V. Zaytsev wrote:
Hi folks!
I have just ran into buffer protocol incompatibility problem with
numpy-1.5.1, which lead me to discover the following ticket (discussed
back in December 2010 on this list):
http://trac.cyt
On 04/15/2011 07:57 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/15/2011 06:45 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
On 15 April 2011 11:20, Yury V. Zaytsev wrote:
Hi folks!
I have just ran into buffer protocol incompatibility problem with
numpy-1.5.1, which lead me to discover the following ticket (discussed
(Moving discussion from http://markflorisson.wordpress.com/, where Mark
said:)
"""
Started a new branch https://github.com/markflorisson88/cython/tree/openmp .
Now the question is whether sharing attributes should be propagated
outwards. e.g. if you do
for i in prange(m):
for j in prange
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
mark florisson wrote:
On 16 April 2011 18:42, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote: > (Moving discussion from http://markflorisson.wordpress.com/, where
Mark > said:) Ok, sure, it was just an issue I was wondering about at th
risson wrote:
On 18 April 2011 13:06, mark florisson wrote: > On
16 April 2011 18:42, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
>> (Moving discussion from http://markflorisson.wordpress.com/, where Mark >>
said:) > > Ok, sure, it was just an issue I was wondering about at that moment,
&
On 04/21/2011 10:37 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 7:51 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
On 18 April 2011 16:41, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Excellent! Sounds great! (as I won't have my laptop for some days I can't
have a look yet but I will later)
You're r
On 04/29/2011 12:53 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 29 April 2011 12:28, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
Fri, 29 Apr 2011 11:30:19 +0200, mark florisson wrote:
On 29 April 2011 11:03, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
[clip]
Are you planning to special-case the "real_t complex" syntax? Shooting
from the sidelines,
On 04/30/2011 08:39 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 3:53 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
On 29 April 2011 12:28, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
No, just that real_t is specialized to float whenever struct_t is specialized
to A and to double when B. Or a more realistic example,
c
Finally think I figured out how to get pull request emails (thanks to
Gael V). From https://github.com/organizations/cython/teams/24445:
"""
Owners do not receive notifications for the organization's repos by
default. To receive notifications, create a team and add the owners and
repos for whi
On 05/01/2011 06:25 PM, Sturla Molden wrote:
Den 01.05.2011 16:36, skrev Stefan Behnel:
Not everyone uses C++. And the C++ compiler cannot adapt the code to
specific Python object types.
Ok, that makes sence.
Second question: Why not stay with the current square-bracket syntax?
Does Cython
n
On 05/02/2011 03:00 PM, Sturla Molden wrote:
Den 02.05.2011 11:15, skrev Dag Sverre Seljebotn:
I.e., your question is very vague.
Ok, what I wanted to ask was "why have one syntax for interfacing C++
templates and another for generics?" It seems like syntax bloat to me.
But we do
On 05/02/2011 03:00 PM, Sturla Molden wrote:
Den 02.05.2011 11:15, skrev Dag Sverre Seljebotn:
I.e., your question is very vague.
Ok, what I wanted to ask was "why have one syntax for interfacing C++
templates and another for generics?" It seems like syntax bloat to me.
You
On 05/03/2011 09:59 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 3 May 2011 00:21, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 1:56 PM, mark florisson
wrote:
On 2 May 2011 18:24, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 2:38 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
A remaining issue which I'm not quite certain
On 05/03/2011 10:42 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 3 May 2011 10:07, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 05/03/2011 09:59 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 3 May 2011 00:21, Robert Bradshawwrote:
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 1:56 PM, mark florisson
wrote:
On 2 May 2011 18:24, Robert Bradshaw
On 05/03/2011 10:49 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 3 May 2011 10:44, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 05/03/2011 10:42 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 3 May 2011 10:07, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 05/03/2011 09:59 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 3 May 2011 00:21, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
On
On 05/03/2011 03:51 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
mark florisson, 03.05.2011 15:17:
if you have
cdef func(floating x, floating y):
...
you get a "float, float" version, and a "double, double" version, but
not "float, double" or "double, float".
So, what would you have to do in order to get a "flo
I was wrong. We need
cdef f(floating x, floating_p y)
...to get 2 specializations, not 4. And the rest follows from there. So I'm
with Robert's real stance :-)
I don't think we want flexibility, we want simplicity over all. You can always
use a templating language.
Btw we shouldn't count on p
On 05/03/2011 08:19 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
Btw we shouldn't count on pruning for the design of this, I think this will
for a large part be used with def functions. And if you use a cdef function
from another module through a pxd, you also need all versions.
Well, we'll want to avoid compil
On 05/04/2011 01:07 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
mark florisson wrote:
cdef func(floating x, floating y):
...
you get a "float, float" version, and a "double, double" version, but
not "float, double" or "double, float".
It's hard to draw conclusions from this example because
it's degenerate. You do
On 05/04/2011 12:00 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 21 April 2011 20:13, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 04/21/2011 10:37 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 7:51 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
On 18 April 2011 16:41, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
Excellent! Sounds great! (as I
On 05/04/2011 12:59 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 12:45, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 05/04/2011 12:00 PM, mark florisson wrote:
There are two remaining issue. The first is warnings for potentially
uninitialized variables for prange(). When you do
for i in prange(start, stop
On 05/04/2011 01:30 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 13:15, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 05/04/2011 12:59 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 12:45, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 05/04/2011 12:00 PM, mark florisson wrote:
There are two remaining issue. The first is
On 05/04/2011 01:41 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 13:39, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 05/04/2011 01:30 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 13:15, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 05/04/2011 12:59 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 12:45, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote
On 05/04/2011 01:48 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 13:47, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 13:45, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Look.
i = 42
for i in prange(n):
f(i)
print i # want 42 whenever n == 0
Now, translate this to:
i = 42;
#pragma omp parallel for firstprivate(i
On 05/04/2011 01:59 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 13:54, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 05/04/2011 01:48 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 13:47, mark florissonwrote:
On 4 May 2011 13:45, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
Look.
i = 42
for i in prange(n):
f(i)
print
On 05/04/2011 02:17 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 14:10, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 05/04/2011 01:59 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 13:54, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 05/04/2011 01:48 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 13:47, mark florisson wrote
Moving pull requestion discussion
(https://github.com/cython/cython/pull/28) over here:
First, I got curious why you'd have a strip off "-pthread" from CC. I'd
think you could just execute with it with "-pthread", which seems simpler.
Second: If parallel.parallel is not callable, how are sche
On 05/04/2011 07:03 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 18:35, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Moving pull requestion discussion (https://github.com/cython/cython/pull/28)
over here:
First, I got curious why you'd have a strip off "-pthread" from CC. I'd
think you could
On 05/04/2011 08:07 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 19:44, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 05/04/2011 07:03 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 4 May 2011 18:35, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
Moving pull requestion discussion
(https://github.com/cython/cython/pull/28)
over here:
First, I
On 05/04/2011 08:13 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:47 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
On 4 May 2011 10:24, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 05/04/2011 01:07 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
mark florisson wrote:
cdef func(floating x, floating y):
...
you get a "float, float&quo
On 05/05/2011 08:42 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Anand Patil
wrote:
On May 4, 8:16 pm, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Anand Patil
wrote:
scikits/sparse/cholmod.c: In function
‘
There was just a messup in git history: Mark's OpenMP pull request got
merged twice; all commits show up two times.
It doesn't matter, since the two openmp branches with the same changes
merged OK, but we shouldn't make this a habit. For instance, the openMP
commits also show up as part of vit
On 05/05/2011 10:09 PM, mark florisson wrote:
On 5 May 2011 21:52, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
There was just a messup in git history: Mark's OpenMP pull request got
merged twice; all commits show up two times.
It doesn't matter, since the two openmp branches with the same changes
PM, Stefan Behnel wrote: >
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 05.05.2011 21:52: >> >> There was just a messup in git
history: Mark's OpenMP pull request got >> merged twice; all commits show up
two times. > > What (I think) happened, was that Vitja pulled in Mark's
hat.
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
Yes, that is the only time it happens.
Do we agree on a) ask before you pull anything that is not in cython/* (ie
in private repos), b) document it in hackerguide?
DS
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please e
On 05/05/2011 11:07 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I don't like the default to be "don't pull from me"--I'd rather there
be some convention to indicate a branch is being used as a queue.
Maybe even foo-queue, or a leading underscore if people like that.
I've seen leading underscore being used by ot
On 05/06/2011 09:14 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 05/05/2011 11:07 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I don't like the default to be "don't pull from me"--I'd rather there
be some convention to indicate a branch is being used as a queue.
Maybe even foo-queue, or a leading
On 05/06/2011 09:24 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
2011/5/6 Dag Sverre Seljebotn:
On 05/06/2011 08:20 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
2011/5/6 Robert Bradshaw:
I don't like the default to be "don't pull from me"--I'd rather there
be some convention to indicate a branch is bei
On 05/09/2011 09:29 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
I've never been using buffers so my question is:
Should uninitialized buffer access raise UnboundLocalVariable error?
Like this:
def foo():
cdef object bar
print bar
"object[int]" should behave exactly the same way as "object" does d
On 05/13/2011 12:36 AM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
There was just a messup in git history: Mark's OpenMP pull request got
merged twice; all commits show up two times.
It doesn't matter, since the two openmp branches wit
On 05/13/2011 09:05 AM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
On 05/13/2011 12:36 AM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
There was just a messup in git history: Mark's OpenMP pull re
On 05/21/2011 07:57 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Robert Bradshaw, 20.05.2011 17:33:
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
why is the "nonecheck" directive set to False by default? Shouldn't it
rather be a "I know what I'm doing" option that allows advanced users to
trade speed for s
On 05/22/2011 02:33 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi,
I've been looking at the nqueens benchmark for a while, and I think it's
actually not that a bad benchmark for generators.
http://hg.python.org/benchmarks/file/tip/performance/bm_nqueens.py
A better implementation only for Py2.7/Py3 is here:
ht
On 05/23/2011 10:50 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
2011/5/23 Stefan Behnel:
Vitja Makarov, 23.05.2011 10:13:
With live variable analysis that should be easy to save/restore only
active variables at the yield point.
"Active" in the sense of "modified", I suppose? That's what I was expecting.
Act
On 05/26/2011 10:12 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Robert Bradshaw, 26.05.2011 09:40:
the pattern of swapping out builtin methods (and perhaps
functions) with more optimized C versions is something that perhaps it
would be good to be able to do more generally, rather than hard coding
the list into Opt
1 - 100 of 369 matches
Mail list logo
