[Numpy-discussion] moving forward around ABI/API compatibilities (was numpy 1.7.x branch)

Travis Oliphant travis@continuum...
Tue Jun 26 10:02:05 CDT 2012


>> 
>> (I have not read the whole cython discussion yet)
> 
> So here's the summary. It's rather complicated but also incredibly neat 
> :-) And technical details can be hidden behind a tight API.

Could you provide a bit more context for this list.     I think this is an important technology concept.   I'd like to understand better how well it jives with Numba-produced APIs and how we can make use of it in NumPy.   

Where exactly would this be used in the NumPy API?  What would it replace? 

> 
>  - We introduce a C-level metaclass, "extensibletype", which to each 
> type adds a branch-miss-free string->pointer hash table. The ndarray 
> type is made an instance of this metaclass, so that you can do
> 
> PyCustomSlots_GetTable(array_object->ob_type)
> 
>  - The hash table uses a perfect hashing scheme:
> 
>   a) We take the lower 64 bits of md5 of the lookup string (this can be 
> done compile-time or module-load-time) as a pre-hash "h".
> 
>   b) When looking up the table for a key with pre-hash "h", the index 
> in the table is given by
> 
> ((h >> table->r) & table->m1) ^ table->d[r & table->m2]
> 
> Then, *if* the element is present, it will always be found on the first 
> try; the table is guaranteed collisionless. This means that an expensive 
> branch-miss can be avoided. It is really incredibly fast in practice, 
> with a 0.5 ns penalty on my 1.8 GHz laptop.
> 
> The magic is in finding the right table->r and table->d. For a 64-slot 
> table, parameters r and d[0]..d[63] can be found in 10us on my machine 
> (it's an O(n) operation). (table->d[i] has type uint16_t)
> 
> (This algorithm was found in an academic paper which I'm too lazy to dig 
> up from that thread right now; perfect hashing is an active research field.)
> 
> The result? You can use this table to store function pointers in the 
> type, like C++ virtual tables or like the built-in slots like 
> tp_get_buffer, but *without* having to agree on everything at 
> compile-time like in C++. And the only penalty is ~0.5 ns per call and 
> some cache usage.
> 
> Cython would use this to replace the current custom "cdef class" vtable 
> with something more tools could agree on, e.g. store function pointers 
> in the table with keys like
> 
> "method:foo:i4i8->f4"
> 
> But NumPy could easily store entries relating to its C API in the same 
> hash table,
> 
> "numpy:SHAPE"
> 
> Then, the C API functions would all take PyObject*, look up the fast 
> hash table on the ob_type.
> 
> This allows for incredibly flexible duck typing on the C level.

This does sound very nice.   

> 
> PyArray_Check would just check for the presence of the C API but not 
> care about the actual Python type, i.e., no PyObject_TypeCheck.
> 
> Me and Robert have talked a lot about this and will move forward with it 
> for Cython. Obviously I don't expect others than me to pick it up for 
> NumPy so we'll see... I'll write up a specification document sometimes 
> over the next couple of weeks as we need that even if only for Cython.

We will look forward to what you come up with. 

Best regards,

-Travis



More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list