On Jan 25, 2009, at 12:50 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote: > > Robert Bradshaw wrote: >> After much development, it looks like Cython 0.11 is getting stable >> enough to release. Please try out the beta, which is the current tip >> of sage-devel. > > Thanks, Robert. I bet you meant "cython-devel", though. ;)
Yep, oops. > I recently went through the remaining bugs for 0.11 and filtered > out some > that can wait for future releases. We should decide which of the > remaining > bugs we consider blockers or critical for this release, and then > concentrate on fixing those for the release candidate. > > http://trac.cython.org/cython_trac/report/3 Thanks. I'll try to go through that on Monday. FYI, I was typically using the "wishlist" milestone as things that would be nice to have, but aren't bugs or deficiencies per se, nor have any urgency. In the meantime, I hope other people try it out so we (and they) don't have any surprises when we release. Sage compiles and passes all 75000+ doctests, I assume the same for lxml? > For my part, I think the bugs that generate wrong or dangerous code > for > built-in types are worth fixing (#166, #158). Also, most of what > results in > a compiler crash or a runtime crash is probably critical. > > I cannot really comment on the buffer bugs. Some of them look more > like > missing features (i.e. minor issues) rather than major bugs. Hopefully Dag can comment on these, but I think your assessment is correct. > There are also a few bugs that (I guess) you added just as a > reminder for > yourself. It would still be good if you could add some comments to > make > them clearer to others (if only to prevent people from submitting > duplicates or from not submitting non-duplicates), especially if they > depend on finishing up other things before being worth another take in > their own right. Yep, I'll do this. > I assume that's the case for closures? A little status > report in that ticket would be very helpful. It's the only major > (non 0.11) > bug that keeps us from compiling the majority of the Python > regression test > suite. No progress has been made on that recently, I have ideas but haven't had a solid block of time to sit down and work on it. > Finally, it would be good if we had one test case for each open bug. I > added a directory 'tests/bugs' to keep them. The naming convention is: > descriptivename_Txyz.pyx, 'xyz' being the ticket number in trac. > They will > not be part of a normal test run, but you can enable them by > selecting a > bug test explicitly like this (e.g. for ticket 5): > > runtests.py -T5 Good idea. - Robert _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
