[Numpy-discussion] Proposed Roadmap Overview

Matthew Brett matthew.brett@gmail....
Sat Feb 18 01:31:45 CST 2012


On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 10:18 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire
<cjordan1@uw.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Sturla Molden <sturla@molden.no> wrote:
>> Den 18. feb. 2012 kl. 05:01 skrev Jason Grout <jason-sage@creativetrax.com>:
>>> On 2/17/12 9:54 PM, Sturla Molden wrote:
>>>> We would have to write a C++ programming tutorial that is based on Pyton knowledge instead of C knowledge.
>>> I personally would love such a thing.  It's been a while since I did
>>> anything nontrivial on my own in C++.
>> One example: How do we code multiple return values?
>> In Python:
>> - Return a tuple.
>> In C:
>> - Use pointers (evilness)
>> In C++:
>> - Return a std::tuple, as you would in Python.
>> - Use references, as you would in Fortran or Pascal.
>> - Use pointers, as you would in C.
>> C++ textbooks always pick the last...
>> I would show the first and the second method, and perhaps intentionally forget the last.
>> Sturla

> On the flip side, cython looked pretty...but I didn't get the
> performance gains I wanted, and had to spend a lot of time figuring
> out if it was cython, needing to add types, buggy support for numpy,
> or actually the algorithm.

At the time, was the numpy support buggy?  I personally haven't had
many problems with Cython and numpy.

> The C files generated by cython were
> enormous and difficult to read. They really weren't meant for human
> consumption.

Yes, it takes some practice to get used to what Cython will do, and
how to optimize the output.

> As Sturla has said, regardless of the quality of the
> current product, it isn't stable.

I've personally found it more or less rock solid.  Could you say what
you mean by "it isn't stable"?



More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list