[Numpy-discussion] Funded work on Numpy: proposed improvements and request for feedback
Wed Aug 5 09:04:47 CDT 2009
On 08/05/2009 06:45 AM, David Cournapeau wrote:
> Bruce Southey wrote:
>> So if 'C99-like' is going to be the near term future, is there any
>> point in supporting non-C99 environments with this work?
> There may be a misunderstanding:
Really ignorance :-)
> if the platform support C99 complex,
> then we will use it, and otherwise, we will do as today, that is define
> our own type.
Actually I did understand that much.
> The advantages of reusing the C99 complex type if available:
> - if yourself do not care about portability, you can use the numpy
> complex typedef as a C99 complex, using addition, division, etc...
> - we can reuse the math library.
> I also need some sort of proper C99 support for windows 64 (more exactly
> to reimplement a minimal libgfortran buildable by MS compiler).
>> That is, is the limitation in the compiler, operating system,
>> processor or some combination of these?
> That's purely a compiler issue. Of course, the main culprit is MS
> compiler. MS explicitly stated they did not care about proper C support.
Obviously complicated by the distribution of the official Python MS
Ultimately, my view is looking at long term maintenance when people
have moved on and the code gets somewhat stale. Definitely your proposal
would help long term maintenance of Numpy using C99 supported compilers
if included. So my concern is avoiding divergence of the code base
between the Numpy and the library so there is no unnecessary code
duplication, no need to merge code in the future and fixes (bugs or
enhancements) get fixed once that applies to both aspects. Provided
these aspects are addressed I have no problems with the proposal.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion