[Numpy-discussion] testing binary installer for OS X
Charles R Harris
charlesr.harris@gmail....
Fri Feb 26 14:23:59 CST 2010
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Charles R Harris <
charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:53 AM, <josef.pktd@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Charles R Harris
>> <charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:44 AM, <josef.pktd@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Charles R Harris
>> >> <charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Pauli Virtanen <pav@iki.fi> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> pe, 2010-02-26 kello 12:26 -0500, josef.pktd@gmail.com kirjoitti:
>> >> >> [clip]
>> >> >> > recompiling wouldn't be enough, the cython c files also need to be
>> >> >> > regenerated for a different numpy version.
>> >> >> > (If I understand the problem correctly.)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No. The Cython-generated sources just use sizeof(PyArray_Descr), the
>> >> >> value is not hardcoded, so it's a compile-time issue.
>> >> >
>> >> > So Ralf need to be sure that scipy was compiled against, say,
>> numpy1.3.
>> >>
>> >> I think I mixed up some things then,
>> >> scipy 0.7.1 cython files should be regenerated with the latest cython
>> >> release so that it doesn't check the sizeof anymore.
>> >> Then, a scipy 0.7.1 build against numpy 1.3 would also work without
>> >> recompiling against numpy 1.4.1
>> >>
>> >> Is this correct?
>> >>
>> >
>> > Yes, but the aim of 1.4.1 is that it should work with the existing
>> binaries
>> > of scipy, i.e., it should be backward compatible with no changes in
>> dtype
>> > sizes and such so that even files generated with the old cython
>> shouldn't
>> > cause problems.
>>
>> We had this discussion but David said that this is impossible, binary
>> compatibility doesn't remove the (old) cython problem.
>>
>>
> Depends on what you mean by binary compatibility. If something is added to
> the end of a structure, then it is still backwards compatible because the
> offsets of old entries don't change, but the old cython will fail in that
> case because the size changes. If the sizes are all the same, then there
> should be no problem and that is what we are shooting for. There are
> additions to the c_api in 1.4 but I think that structure is private.
>
>
I note that there are still traces of datetime in the 1.4.x public include
files, although the desc size looks right.
Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20100226/83b2d79a/attachment.html
More information about the NumPy-Discussion
mailing list