[Numpy-discussion] Github migration?

Charles R Harris charlesr.harris@gmail....
Mon Aug 23 21:54:30 CDT 2010


On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Travis Oliphant <oliphant@enthought.com>wrote:

>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm curious as to the status of the Github migration and if there is
> anything I can do to help.  I have a couple of weeks right now and I would
> love to see us make the transition of both NumPy and SciPy to GIT.
>
> On a slightly related note, it would really help the numpy-refactor project
> if it received more input from others in the community.   Right now, the
> numpy-refactor is happening on a public github branch (named numpy-refactor)
> awaiting numpy itself to be on github.   It would be more useful if the
> numpy-refactor branch were a regular branch of the github NumPy project.
>
> The numpy-refactor project is making great progress and we have a working
> core library that can be built on Windows, Mac, and Linux.     The goal is
> for this numpy-refactor to become the basis for NumPy 2.0 which should come
> out sometime this Fall.     Already, a lot of unit tests have been written
> and code coverage has increased on the core NumPy code which I think we all
> agree is "a good thing"   In addition, some lingering reference count bugs
> (particularly in object arrays) have been found and squashed.
>
> There is also some good progress on the Cython backend for .NET which would
> allow and also put pressure on migration of most of SciPy to Cython-or-Fwrap
> generated extension modules.
>
> I am looking forward to working on NumPy a little more over the coming
> months.
>
> All the best,
>
>
I've been having some fun browsing through the branch but don't have much to
say on such short acquaintance.

I wonder if the patch in ticket
#1085<http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/ticket/1085>might be something
you folks could look at now that the loops have been
moved about and such? Also, it would be nice if the extended comment style
was rigidly adhered to, although things look pretty good in that department.
Another nit would be to keep an eye out during the cleanups for "if (blah)
foo;" if statements and clean them up by putting the foo on a separate line
when it is convenient to do so. Apart from that it looks like Ilan and Jason
are really getting into it and doing a nice job of regularizing the naming
conventions and such which should make the code easier to read and maintain.
Adding some explanatory comments along the way would also help as it may be
awhile before someone else looks so closely at the code as to have a good
understanding of what the different functions do. I know that gets in the
way of getting the code out, but I throw it out as a wish.

Would it be possible to sketch out how the general layering of functionality
looks at this point? Is there going to be any cleanup of the visible macros?

Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20100823/ab77d600/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list