On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I replaced the half-a-ton of cython-devel jobs in Jenkins by three
> multi-configuration matrix jobs:
>
> https://sage.math.washington.edu:8091/hudson/job/cython-devel-build/
>
> https://sage.math.washington.edu:8091/hudson/job/cython-
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw, 06.09.2011 22:21:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>>
>>> I replaced the half-a-ton of cython-devel jobs in Jenkins by three
>>> mult
Does it work with icc if you replace
# define CYTHON_UNUSED __attribute__ ((__unused__))
with
# define CYTHON_UNUSED __attribute__ ((unused))
?
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Christoph Gohlke wrote:
> Hello,
>
> compiling Cython 0.15 generated C code on Windows using the Intel Compil
I don't have 10.7, but might be able to borrow a computer that does.
This sounds more like a linking/C compilation problem than a Cython
issue though. Do the programs in the Cython's demos directory work for
you?
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Wes McKinney wrote:
> Multiple users have reporting
+1 to another release soon. Is there anything in the devel branch
that's not ready to go out? (I was also thinking of doing a release as
soon as fused functions and memory views got in.)
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> Are we going to make a bugfix release?
>
> There are
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2011/9/11 Stefan Behnel :
>> Stefan Behnel, 11.09.2011 15:08:
>>>
>>> I see two ways to get a release out: create a branch from the current
>>> master and remove from it what we don't consider stable (or 'right' for
>>> that release), or mer
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 11.09.2011 16:35:
>>
>> Wouldn't it be easier if everyone went through the pull-request
>> process (which means you test stuff in your own branch first) for
>> anything but trivial fixes? Then we only ever get "stable-ish"
>>
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
> On 9 September 2011 05:26, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> Does it work with icc if you replace
>>
>> # define CYTHON_UNUSED __attribute__ ((__unused__))
>>
>> with
>>
>>
Looks like a bug to me, thanks. http://trac.cython.org/cython_trac/ticket/732
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Hagen Fürstenau wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm new to Cython, so I don't know if this is a bug, a known limitation, or
> a misunderstanding on my part, but the following simple example produces C
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:01 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw, 13.09.2011 05:49:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
>>>
>>> 2011/9/11 Stefan Behnel:
>>>>
>>>> Stefan Behnel, 11.09.2011 15:08:
>>
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Yaroslav Halchenko, 15.09.2011 17:08:
>>
>> On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I guess we're set for a release then, right?
>>
>>> +1. Should we send a release can
See http://wiki.cython.org/ReleaseNotes-0.15.1 This is a bugfix only
release, we hope to get it out shortly.
- Robert
___
cython-devel mailing list
cython-devel@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw, 15.09.2011 22:31:
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>>
>>> Yaroslav Halchenko, 15.09.2011 17:08:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Robert Brad
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2011/9/16 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis :
>> 1 test failure with Python 2.6:
>>
>> compiling (c) and running tupleunpack_T712 ... Doctest:
>> tupleunpack_T712.__test__.single_from_set (line 12) ... ok
>> Doctest: tupleunpack_T712.__tes
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Yaroslav Halchenko
wrote:
> is this regression or am I missing cython basics (which wouldn't be
> surprising).
>
> while testing 0.15.1 on Debian I have ran into fail-to-build-from-source
> for dipy package in Debian, failure due to error while running tests:
>
>
nt to Davy Jones' Locker:
http://trac.cython.org/cython_trac/query?group=component&milestone=0.15.1
. Ye motherload at
https://github.com/cython/cython/compare/0.15...0.15.1
We be much beholden to ye hearties fer manning ye oars: Stefan Behnel,
Robert Bradshaw, Armon Dadgar, Mark Florisson, Gordi
Thanks and thanks. Fixed.
2011/9/20 Stéfan van der Walt :
> Hi all,
>
> The mailing list address on the cython.org front page still points to
> codespeak.
>
> I enjoyed the release message. Arr! :)
>
> Regards
> Stéfan
> ___
> cython-devel mailing list
2011/9/19 Stéfan van der Walt :
> Hi all,
>
> I only recently found out that the mailing list had shifted, so I hope
> my message reaches you this time!
>
> On the current development version of Cython, the attached script
> makes Cython go into an infinite loop, but let's hope that's just on
> my
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> 2011/9/19 Stéfan van der Walt :
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I only recently found out that the mailing list had shifted, so I hope
>> my message reaches you this time!
>>
>> On the current development version
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> 2011/9/19 Stéfan van der Walt :
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I only recently found out that the mailing list had shifted, so I hope
>>>
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 12:32 AM, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I got a (misleading) Cython warning from the following code example:
>
>
> cdef extern from "":
> void foo(int &a, int &b)
>
> cdef cyfoo():
> cdef int cya, cyb
> foo(cya, cyb)
> -
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 1:20 AM, wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>
>> The warning seem correct to me, or is foo actually modifying the
>> values of cya and cyb? (I suppose this could be possible by taking the
>> address of the "passed by ref
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 5:08 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2011/9/22 Robert Bradshaw :
>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 1:20 AM, wrote:
>>> Hi Robert,
>>>
>>> Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The warning seem correct to me, or is foo actual
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Brett Calcott wrote:
> Hi. I've just reverted to 0.14.1 because 0.15 breaks code that implements a
> cpp callback in python. It seems to be a name-mangling problem.
> I've attached a short test case that shows the problem. They both compile
> fine on 14.1 and 15. B
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2011/9/23 Robert Bradshaw :
>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 5:08 AM, Vitja Makarov
>> wrote:
>>> 2011/9/22 Robert Bradshaw :
>>>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 1:20 AM, wrote:
>>>>> Hi Robert,
&
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2011/9/23 mark florisson :
>> On 23 September 2011 06:02, Robert Bradshaw
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Vitja Makarov
>>> wrote:
>>>> 2011/9/23 Robert Bradshaw :
>>
I can't log in either, though I haven't had a chance to investigate.
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Today I found that I can't login into my trac account. Is that common
> problem or only mine?
>
> --
> vitja.
> ___
> cy
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Vitja Makarov, 30.09.2011 06:41:
>>
>> 2011/9/28 Vitja Makarov:
>>>
>>> I tried to build simple plan for ongoing cython function refactoring
>>>
>>> * Replace assignment synthesis with SingleAssignmentNode, where LHS is
>>> NameNode and RHS
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:19 PM, mark florisson
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I briefly mentioned something about this in a pull request, but maybe
> it deserves some actual discussion on the ML.
>
> So I propose that after fused types gets merged we try to move as many
> utility codes as possible to their uti
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 04.10.2011 23:19:
>>
>> So I propose that after fused types gets merged we try to move as many
>> utility codes as possible to their utility code files (unless they are
>> used in pending pull requests or other branches). Pref
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> Are you saying that when coercing a struct to an object, one would copy
> scalar fields by value but reference array fields? -1, that would be
> confusing. Either the whole struct through a view, or copy it all.
+1
> It bothers me th
On Wednesday, October 5, 2011, mark florisson wrote:
> On 5 October 2011 01:46, Robert Bradshaw
> >
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:19 PM, mark florisson
> > > wrote:
> >> Hey,
> >>
> >> I briefly mentioned something about this in
On Wednesday, October 5, 2011, mark florisson wrote:
> On 5 October 2011 08:16, Stefan Behnel >
> wrote:
> > mark florisson, 04.10.2011 23:19:
> >>
> >> So I propose that after fused types gets merged we try to move as many
> >> utility codes as possible to their utility code files (unless they ar
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>
>> On this note, eventually I would like coerce structs (and unions,
>> enums) to auto-generated wrapper classes, visible in the Python module
>> namespace if one declares them as "cpde
Thanks for the update and link. Sounds like PyCon-DE went well.
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 09.10.2011 19:57:
>>
>> On 9 October 2011 18:35, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>>
>>> One of the impressions I took out of the technical discussions with Kay
>>> is
>>>
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 5:57 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> On 10/09/2011 02:18 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
>>
>> On 10/09/2011 02:11 PM, mark florisson wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> So far people have been enthusiastic about the cython.parallel features,
>>> I think we should introduce some n
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:12 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 9 October 2011 22:27, mark florisson wrote:
>>
>> On 9 October 2011 21:48, Jon Olav Vik wrote:
>> > On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 9:01 PM, mark florisson
>> > wrote:
>> >> On 9 October 2011 19:54, Jon Olav Vik wrote:
>> >>> Personally, I thi
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 09:55 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>> I'm less sure about single, since making it a function indicates one
>>> could
>>> use it in other contexts and the whole thing becomes too ma
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 1:49 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 10:36 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
>>
>> On 10/12/2011 09:55 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 5:57 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
>>> wrote:
>>>
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 10:10 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 12.10.2011 23:46:
>
> On 10 October 2011 16:17, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>
>> Jenkins currently reports several failures, and this one seems to be
>> due to your tempita changes:
>>
>
> https://sa
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 7:55 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
>>> I ultimately feel things like that is more important than 100% coverage of
>>> the OpenMP standard. Of course, OpenMP is a lot lower-hanging fruit.
>>
>> +1 Prange handles the (corse-grained) SIMD case nicely, and a
>> task/futures model b
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Romain Guillebert, 18.10.2011 20:43:
>>
>> I'll try to do that this week, I agree that it's better to get this
>> branch merged.
>
> Cool.
Thanks!
>> Rpython isn't suitable at all for this kind of use case because you have
>> to recompile
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 1:07 PM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 14 October 2011 19:31, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 7:55 AM, mark florisson
>> wrote:
>>>>> I ultimately feel things like that is more important than 100% coverage of
>>>
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 2:52 PM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 24 October 2011 22:03, Greg Ewing wrote:
>> mark florisson wrote:
>>>
>>> These will by default not lock for operations to allow
>>> e.g. one thread to iterate over the list and another thread to index
>>> it without lock contention and
With Mark's fused types and memory views going in, I think it's about
time for a new release. Thoughts? Anyone want to volunteer to take up
the process?
- Robert
___
cython-devel mailing list
cython-devel@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinf
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 1:59 PM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 28 October 2011 21:55, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> With Mark's fused types and memory views going in, I think it's about
>> time for a new release. Thoughts? Anyone want to volunteer to take up
&g
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 28.10.2011 22:59:
>>
>> On 28 October 2011 21:55, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>>
>>> With Mark's fused types and memory views going in, I think it's about
>>> time for a ne
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 4:41 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> Hm ok I'll disable them then. Pointers and some other dtypes are also
> not supported yet. As for the documentation, have you guys reviewed
> the documentation for fused types and memoryviews?
I looked at the fused types docs.
> For instan
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 10:44 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 29 October 2011 18:05, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 4:41 AM, mark florisson
>> wrote:
>>> Hm ok I'll disable them then. Pointers and some other dtypes are also
>>> no
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 2:48 AM, Brett Calcott wrote:
> Hi all,
> The path in cython's error output is insensitive to the cwd where cython in
> invoked. It seems to be based on this variable in Cython/Compiler/Main.py:
> relative_path_in_code_position_comments = True,
> If I understand it right,
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:21 PM, mark florisson
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Currently when we want to convert C arrays to memoryview slices we have to
> do this:
>
> cdef int array[5][4]
> cdef int[:, :] slice = array
> I'd like to be able to write
> cdef int array[5][4]
> cdef int[:, :] slice
> slice =
I'm all for allowing it at the Cython level even though we can't emit
code for it at the C level (due to C compiler bugs, right?)
- Robert
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 3:12 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> I think we should allow nested prange()s, although it won't invoke
> nested OpenMP parallelism now,
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm now trying to make inlined generator expressions work again. And I
> found strange thing:
>
> inlined_generator_expression.pyx:
>
> def range_sum(int N):
> """
> >>> sum(range(10))
> 45
> >>> range_sum(10)
> 45
>
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2011/11/26 Robert Bradshaw :
>> On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Vitja Makarov
>> wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I'm now trying to make inlined generator expres
The problem was with the definition of PyArray_SearchSorted, namely
cdef object PyArray_SearchSorted (ndarray, object, NPY_SEARCHSIDE)
The problem was that NPY_SEARCHSIDE wasn't defined as a type, so it
was treating that as the argument name (implicitly typed to be
object).
https://github.co
Thanks.
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Mansour Moufid wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Attached is a quick fix for some typos in stdint.pxd.
>
> Tested with Cython version 0.15.1.
>
> Mansour
>
> ___
> cython-devel mailing list
> cython-devel@python.org
> http://ma
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
> On 2 January 2012 22:37, Mansour Moufid wrote:
>> Now my issue is as follows.
>>
>> (I CCed the cython-users list if this question is more appropriate there.)
>>
>> I have a simple file, int.pyx:
>>
>> from libc.stdint cimport *
>> print lo
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 6:19 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> I've recently merged my def-node-refactoring branch and found some
> bugs, thanks to sage-build.
>
> Then I've found that sage-tests has >100 failures.
> So I'm wondering does anybody know what's wrong with sage-tests?
Yeah, sage-tests is a
OK, thinks are looking a lot better, but there's still quite a few
random segfaults:
https://sage.math.washington.edu:8091/hudson/view/ext-libs/job/sage-tests/674/console
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 6:19 AM, Vitja Makarov
> wro
I think the right thing to do here is make all module-level globals
into "cdef public" attributes, i.e. C globals with getters and setters
for Python space. I'm not sure whether this would best be done by
creating a custom dict or module subclass, but it would probably be
cleaner and afford much mo
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2012/1/19 Vitja Makarov :
>> 2012/1/19 Robert Bradshaw :
>>> I think the right thing to do here is make all module-level globals
>>> into "cdef public" attributes, i.e. C globals with getters and sette
x27;s near as big of a hurdle (from C).
> On Jan 19, 2012 2:01 AM, "Robert Bradshaw"
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Vitja Makarov
>> wrote:
>> > 2012/1/19 Vitja Makarov :
>> >> 2012/1/19 Robert Bradshaw :
>> >>> I
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Vitja Makarov, 19.01.2012 08:49:
>> 2012/1/19 Robert Bradshaw:
>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
>>>> I tried to optimize module lookups (__pyx_m) by caching internal PyDict
>>
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I did some callgrind profiling on Cython's generators and was surprised to
> find that AddTraceback() represents a serious performance penalty for short
> running generators.
>
> I profiled a compiled Python implementation of itertoo
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 6:09 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2012/1/24 mark florisson :
>> On 24 January 2012 11:37, Konrad Hinsen wrote:
>>> Compiling the attached Cython file produced the attached C file which
>>> has errors in lines 532-534:
>>>
>>> __pyx_v_self->xx = None;
>>> __pyx_v_self->yy =
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 2:27 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> Hey,
>
> It's been almost three months since we talked about a 0.16 release, I
> think it's quite ready. It would already be a big release, it would be
> good to see how people like it, and to catch any issues etc before we
> pile on more fe
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:17 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 25 January 2012 12:00, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> mark florisson, 25.01.2012 11:43:
>>> On 25 January 2012 01:27, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 2:27 AM, mark florisson wrote:
>>>
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 27.01.2012 21:03:
>> On 01/27/2012 05:58 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> mark florisson, 27.01.2012 17:30:
On 27 January 2012 16:22, mark florisson wrote:
> On 27 January 2012 15:47, Simon King wrote:
>> Hi a
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2012/1/26 Jason Grout :
>> On 1/25/12 11:39 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>>
>>> install
>>>
>>> https://sage.math.washington.edu:8091/hudson/view/ext-libs/job/sage-build/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifac
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 8:30 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 31 January 2012 02:12, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 27.01.2012 21:03:
>>>> On 01/27/2012 05:58 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
&g
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> 2012/1/31 Robert Bradshaw :
>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Vitja Makarov
>> wrote:
>>> 2012/1/26 Jason Grout :
>>>> On 1/25/12 11:39 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>>>>
>>>
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
>>
>> Block-local declarations are definitely something we want, although I
>> think it would require some more (non-trivial) changes to the
>> compiler.
>
>
> Note that my proposal was actually not about block-local declarations.
>
> Bl
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Sturla Molden wrote:
> On 07.02.2012 18:22, Dimitri Tcaciuc wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure I understand you, maybe you could elaborate on that?
>
>
> OpenCL code is a text string that is compiled when the program runs. So it
> can be generated from run-time data. Think of
ec(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?
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 2:31 AM, Ro
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
>>> **
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 :
>&
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:
>>>>
Python bytecode -> LLVM is a great idea for creating ufuncs, the
overhead of Cython + GCC is atrocious for stuff like this. (I think
Cython could make a good frontent as well, especially if we generated
just the .c code for the function rather than a full extension module
and used a good compiler t
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:19 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 21 February 2012 04:42, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> Python bytecode -> LLVM is a great idea for creating ufuncs, the
>> overhead of Cython + GCC is atrocious for stuff like this. (I think
>> Cython could m
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just noticed that the star-imports in the cpython package have serious
> side effects. The cpython/__init__.pxd file has this in it:
>
> """
> from cpython.version cimport *
> from cpython.ref cimport *
> from cpython.exc cimport *
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:19 AM, mark florisson
>> wrote:
>>> On 21 February 2012 04:42, Robert Bradshaw
>>> wrote:
>>>> Pyth
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 9:09 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 11 March 2012 09:26, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
>> On 11 March 2012 09:46, mark florisson wrote:
>>> On 10 March 2012 14:00, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Lisandro Dalcin, 10.03.2012 10:51:
> On 10 March 2012 03:41, mark florisson wrote:
>
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was made aware of a difference between the ways Cython and CPython raise
> exceptions. In CPython, the exception is always instantiated immediately,
> even if you raise a plain type, i.e.
>
> raise TypeError
>
> will actually rai
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 21.03.2012 15:12:
>> On 21 March 2012 15:07, mark florisson wrote:
>>> On 21 March 2012 14:58, Stefan Behnel wrote:
it seems like the sage.math server is broken again, at least it's lacking
mounts when I try to log i
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 6:47 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 20 March 2012 18:51, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> mark florisson, 20.03.2012 17:40:
>>> On 18 March 2012 11:58, Stefan Behnel wrote:
I put up two new pull requests on github:
Implementation of PEP 380 (yield from):
https:/
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 10:44 PM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 8 March 2012 14:27, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I noticed that people start rushing for the next season on Python's GSoC
>> mailing lists. Do we have any interested developers here, or general ideas
>> about suitable topics? I wou
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> On 03/21/2012 01:56 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 10:44 PM, mark florisson
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 8 March 2012 14:27, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>>>
>>>
Thanks for the offer. One problem I see is that /levi/scratch (a local
disk) has been dismounted (or reconfigured). To save ourselves random
permissions issues, it's probably best to run this script/job as
scoder (I've got sudo).
I'll see what I can do to get it running, assuming the sage.math
iss
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 6:11 AM, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:04 AM, David Kirkby wrote:
>> On 22 March 2012 12:33, William Stein wrote:
>>> The usb device (for /levi) never appeared after I remotely rebooted
>>> sage.math.
>>> Physical access is thus probably required. I'v
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> William Stein, 22.03.2012 14:11:
>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:04 AM, David Kirkby wrote:
>>> On 22 March 2012 12:33, William Stein wrote:
The usb device (for /levi) never appeared after I remotely rebooted
sage.math.
Physical
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 22.03.2012 17:58:
>> On 03/22/2012 09:03 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> I would prefer copying the original installation over
>>> (including the build history), rather than rebuilding it.
>>
>> I hope it doesn't come to t
However, please
> setup a crontab'd rsync backup of
> anything important on there to your /home directory.
>
> -- William
>
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 2:11 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>> Thanks for the o
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 22.03.2012 19:21:
>> On 03/22/2012 10:52 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 22.03.2012 17:58:
On 03/22/2012 09:03 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> I would prefer copying the original installation over
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> John Hunter, 22.03.2012 20:39:
>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Well, I seem to remember from a talk that NumFOCUS will have a full-time
(or part-time?) position to deal with such administration. And they'll
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Stefan Behnel, 20.03.2012 18:51:
>> mark florisson, 20.03.2012 17:40:
>>> As for the two pull requests, both are quite large, but the dict
>>> iteration rewrite is more like an enhancement whereas the 'yield from'
>>> is really a new (somewh
One more note about release numbering, ideally no 0.x.y release should
be in any way backwards incompatible.
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
>
> IMO, the ideal would be to release 0.16 now and 0.16.1 in a couple of weeks,
> but I respect that this depends on how much
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the NumPy related tests use a file "numpy_common.pxi" that contains this
> useless code:
>
> """
> cdef extern from *:
> bint FALSE "0"
> void import_array()
> void import_umath()
>
> if FALSE:
> import_array()
> import_um
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:52 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Stefan Behnel, 28.03.2012 09:20:
>> Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 28.03.2012 05:05:
>>> - Very often one is not interested in the full header file. One really
>>> wants "the API", not a translation of the C header. This probably requires
>>> a) som
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 8:05 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> On 03/27/2012 02:17 PM, Philip Herron wrote:
>>
>> Hey
>>
>> I got linked to your idea
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/cython-users/browse_thread/thread/cb8aa58083173b97/cac3cf12d438b122?show_docid=cac3cf12d438b122&pli=1
>> by Dav
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Lisandro Dalcin, 27.03.2012 21:34:
>> On 27 March 2012 17:20, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> the NumPy related tests use a file "numpy_common.pxi" that contains this
>>> useless code:
>>>
>>> """
>>> cdef extern from *:
>>> bint FALSE "0"
>>>
201 - 300 of 790 matches
Mail list logo
