I agree. This is very well designed and should hopefully be the framework for building many of the numpy things without having to alter the core of cython. Why did you end up using > for relation2 in your example though?
On 3/7/08, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This looks very, very interesting and promising. I was thinking about > code transformations like this quite a while ago for optimization > reasons. I think this is the way to go. > > > - Robert > > > On Mar 7, 2008, at 12:08 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote: > > > During my work to investigate how NumPy, C++ template etc. support > > could > > best be added I discovered a way of integrating such code that has > > very > > low impact on changing existing code and flow, yet does (I believe) > > have > > the capacity to give quite powerful results. > > > > I've made a prototype: > > - A framework in a 300 line diff > > - An example using the framework: A reimplementation of the good old > > for i in range(x, y) => for i from i <= ... transform, in 40 lines > > > > The whole thing and a long description is here: > > > > http://wiki.cython.org/enhancements/parsetreetransforms > > > > > > -- > > Dag Sverre > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Cython-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev > > _______________________________________________ > Cython-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev > _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
