On Jan 22, 2010, at 12:40 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote: > > Robert Bradshaw, 22.01.2010 08:24: >> It seems we're due for another release... > > Very much +1. > > >> Does anyone have anything else they'd like to see >> in sooner rather than later? Any blockers? > > According to trac, there are no real blockers for 0.12.1. The only > real > bugs targeted for that release are #473 (MSVC problem)
Fix posted, waiting for feedback. > and #467. The latter one can be bad in rare cases but shouldn't do > much harm normally (and isn't > exactly trivial to get right). Not quite a blocker, but it'd be really good to get that fixed. > >> Otherwise I'll start >> rolling alphas and testing on the freshly-minted Sage 4.3.1. > > Please do. > > >> I'd like to see an 0.13 soon thereafter. > > Big +1 again. I'm fine with 0.13.0 being "not 100% stable" but would > love > to have it out there so that people can use the new features and > find bugs. Also, most of the big changes are new features, so even if they're not 100% polished it should be pretty safe with existing code. >> I'm imagining a big release >> where we pull in a bunch of stuff that's been "almost ready" for a >> while: >> >> 1. Safe type inference (on by default) >> >> This seems to be basically ready, but is too big of a change for an >> x.y.z release. > > Ok with me, but that's in cython-devel already. Would you want to > roll back > the implementation or just disable the feature by default? The latter > should basically revert to the original behaviour already, AFAICT. I see at http://hg.cython.org/cython-devel/file/fce98451e2dd/Cython/Compiler/Options.py#l51 that it's False. None is the "safe" value, right? >> 2. Closures > > Sure, let's get that one out and then take a look at where that gets > us. > There hasn't been such a major new feature in Cython for a while, > and this > will enable tons of new use cases and forms the basis for quite a > lot of > other Python features (e.g. lambda and generators). lambda is pretty much there. (IIRC, you did the parse tree transform for that, right?) > > >> Craig Citro wants to run another battery of tests on it > > Can we add that to the regular test suite somehow? Yes, that's the plan. > > >> 3. C++ support > > I can't say I'm anywhere near up-to-date with the status of that, > but if > you think it's at a somewhat stable point, so that existing features > won't > have to get rolled back and replaced, I'm fine with adding it (or > parts of > it) in 0.13. It's always good to enable users to exercise new features > early, and especially the signature overloading support should be very > useful to Cython's optimiser by itself. Yes, I tried to make sure everything exposed is stable and compatible moving forward. There are some design decisions that would be good to confirm before we release (e.g. I added operators cython.preincrement, cython.dereference, etc. which might be suited for shorter names, and we would be fixing on "operator+" rather than "__add__" declaration notation.) I'd like to add a wiki at least, and hopefully a chapter in the user manual, about what can be done. For now, the best is to look at the cpp_* tests, e.g. http://hg.cython.org/gsoc-danilo/file/tip/tests/run/cpp_templates.pyx . A big step forward is that now it understands new, del, and inheritance of types. (Before one had to do all sorts of pointer casting which was really messy.) On top of that, the rest is mostly how many features we support, not a whole new way of wrapping libraries. > What about the Fortran integration? Is there anything we can add > from that > already? If we get a part of that in, we might be able to attract > other > Fortran users. Some of them may even end up participating in the > further > development. Putting this on more shoulders is the best way to push > it further. That'd be nice as well, but it sounds like most of the focus of the project right now is on build systems, and I'm not sure if it's set in stone enough for people to start building codebases around. (I'd be very glad to be wrong, if some of this is ready to go in, now would be great time!) - Robert _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list Cython-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
