On Apr 23, 2009, at 12:40 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:

> Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> On Apr 22, 2009, at 10:33 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>
>>> BTW, my impression is that this isn't ready for cython-devel yet,
>>> given the
>>> amount of open questions and design choices.
>>
>>
>> I think there's a lot one could do here (e.g. automatically finding/
>> including dependancies, etc.) but that something really simple (you
>> can make a .c file into an executable, why not a .pyx file) is
>> valuable too.
>>
>> In terms of -devel vs. -unstable, I see -unstable as a place to put
>> things that may break Cython (e.g. internal reorganizations, messing
>> with the type system, or other deeper stuff). My view is that all
>> (non-bug) tests should always pass in the tip of -devel, and of
>> course not break things we don't have tests for yet.
>
> Well, it makes the tree "unstable" in the sense that it adds
> functionality which one must then continue to support in order to be
> backwards compatible, which is a decision which could stall a  
> release of
> the branch.
>
> Remove the command-line switch and it is fixed.

Or even remove the option from the help--undocumented flags are  
always subject to change. But it's a whole different class than the  
much-needed, but scary, reworking of temps or adding closures.

- Robert


_______________________________________________
Cython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev

Reply via email to