On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 9:55 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 22:45, Charles R Harris > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Stefan, > > > > I notice that you have merged some new ufunc infrastructure. I think > these > > sort of things should be discussed and reviewed on the list before being > > committed. Could you explain what the purpose of these patches is? The > > commit messages are rather skimpy. > > Stéfan happens to be in our offices this week, so he did discuss it > with Travis, at least. This was actually contributed to us with > extensive details from Wenjie Fu and Hans-Andreas Engel here: > > http://projects.scipy.org/scipy/numpy/ticket/887 > Can we fix the ticket notification mailings some day? It's been almost four months now. Re: the patch. I noticed the replacement of the signed type int by an unsigned size_t. This is a risky sort of thing and needs to be checked. Nor is it clear we should use size_t instead of one of the python or numpy types. The use of inline and the local declaration of variables would also have been caught early in a code review. So I think in this case the patch should have been discussed and reviewed on the list. An internal discussion at Enthought doesn't serve the same purposel. Chuck
_______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
