On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 11:30 AM, David Cournapeau <courn...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi Dag, > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Dag Sverre > Seljebotn<da...@student.matnat.uio.no> wrote: > > [Let me know if this should go to numpy-discuss instead.] > > > > I guess this can be discussed on the ML as well (I CC to the list). > > > > > I see that there are currently two modes, and that it is possible to > build > > NumPy using a master .c-file #include-ing the rest. (Which is much more > > difficult to support using Cython, though not impossible.) > > > > Is there any plans for the one-file build to go away, or is supporting > this > > a requirement? > > This is a requirement, as supporting this depends on non standard > compilers extensions (that's why it is not the default - but it works > well, I am always using this mode when working on numpy since the > build/test/debug cycle is so much shorter with numscons and this). > > The basic problem is as follows: > - On Unix at least, a function is exported in a shared library by default. > - The usual way to avoid polluting the namespace is to put static in > front of it > - You can't reuse a static function in another compilation unit > (there is no "friend static"). > > So what happens in the multi-files build is that the function are > tagged as hidden instead of static, with hidden being > __attribute__((hidden)) for gcc, nothing for MS compiler (on windows, > you have to tag the exported functions, nothing is exported by > default), and will break on other platforms. > Does the build actually break or is it the case that a lot of extraneous names become visible, increasing the module size and exposing functions that we don't what anyone to access? Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
