Well, what numexpr is using is basically NpyIter_AdvancedNew: https://github.com/pydata/numexpr/blob/master/numexpr/interpreter.cpp#L1178
and nothing else. If NPY_MAXARGS could be increased just for that, and without ABI breaking, then fine. If not, we should have to wait until 1.9 I am afraid. On the other hand, increasing the temporary arrays in nditer from 32kb to 128kb is a bit worrying, but probably we should do some benchmarks and see how much performance would be compromised (if any). Francesc On 2/28/14, 1:09 PM, Julian Taylor wrote: > hm increasing it for PyArrayMapIterObject would break the public ABI. > While nobody should be using this part of the ABI its not appropriate > for a bugfix release. > Note that as it currently stands in numpy 1.9.dev we will break this ABI > for the indexing improvements. > > Though for nditer and some other functions we could change it if thats > enough. > It would bump some temporary arrays of nditer from 32kb to 128kb, I > think that would still be fine, but getting to the point where we should > move them onto the heap. > > On 28.02.2014 12:41, Francesc Alted wrote: >> Hi Julian, >> >> Any chance that NPY_MAXARGS could be increased to something more than >> the current value of 32? There is a discussion about this in: >> >> https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/226 >> >> but I think that, as Charles was suggesting, just increasing NPY_MAXARGS >> to something more reasonable (say 256) should be enough for a long while. >> >> This issue limits quite a bit the number of operands in numexpr >> expressions, and hence, to other projects that depends on it, like >> PyTables or pandas. See for example this bug report: >> >> https://github.com/PyTables/PyTables/issues/286 >> >> Thanks, >> Francesc >> >> On 2/27/14, 9:05 PM, Julian Taylor wrote: >>> hi, >>> >>> We want to start preparing the release candidate for the bugfix release >>> 1.8.1rc1 this weekend, I'll start preparing the changelog tomorrow. >>> >>> So if you want a certain issue fixed please scream now or better create >>> a pull request/patch on the maintenance/1.8.x branch. >>> Please only consider bugfixes, no enhancements (unless they are really >>> really simple), new features or invasive changes. >>> >>> I just finished my list of issues I want backported to numpy 1.8 >>> (gh-4390, gh-4388). Please check if its already included in these PRs. >>> I'm probably still going to add gh-4284 after some though tomorrow. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Julian >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NumPy-Discussion mailing list >>> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org >>> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >> > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion -- Francesc Alted _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
