On Sep 13, 2008, at 4:57 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote: > I currently don't have much time for Cython (studies takes up most of > it), and what few hours I have for Cython I always keep getting > into the > result_code problem; that result_code on a node should be calculated > during code generation rather than during analysis. This has been > changed in Pyrex, but the changes going into Cython after that is > substantial enough that I get problems (as in: I need to spend much > time > in understanding the changes that went into Cython etc.) > > http://trac.cython.org/cython_trac/ticket/67 > > In short, this is the kind of task that I feel someone who knew the > code > and the changes that went into Cython better would spend half a day > to a > day on, while myself I could spend two days and do a worse job. > OTOH, I > am the one craving it. > > What I can say is that until this gets done, I'm blocked on my > projects. > While I'm happy to stay blocked until I fix it myself (it is my itch > after all) I at least wanted to air the issue and see if anyone else > would think this is an easier task (because they know the area better) > and is willing to take it up. > > So my questions are: > 1) Do you agree with me in the high priority I assign to this task?
Yes. > 2) How are we (/am I) going to get it done? Depends. I just finished up my job here and may have some time this next week. If so I will try and do this. > > Failing anything else, I think at least I'd be able to put in a few > days > for this in January. That's a while though. > > Details: > With this done, one could have: > - (Incrementally cleaner code when it comes to temp allocation) > - Closures/inner functions with approx. a week of of work. > - A "LetNode", which would make transformations much stronger: > Transforming the loops to a common construct, transforming various > assignments to more basic constructs etc. would be very easy. (Not a > priority though.) > - One would jump over an issue I currently have with how CloneNode > interfers with the order of phases so that I cannot get buffers for > complex numbers to work... > > So, I believe my motivation is practical rather than theoretical. > Pyrex > already having done this seems to support my argument as well. (In > fact > there's a lot of stuff gone into Pyrex which seems to be quite an > improvement -- some of this reinvented by me over the summer in > fact -- > and Cython is lagging behind when it comes to code structure in some > sense. Well, that's how it is, and I think remerging all Pyrex > would be > way too much work?) Our codebases have diverged too far for a straight merge...and moving structural issues over could be hard (sometimes not worth the investment compared to other stuff we could do). It would be nice to have a centralized page with any stuff you feel we're lagging behind on. - Robert _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
