[Cython] 0.16 release

[Robert Bradshaw]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:49 AM, mark florisson
<markflorisson88 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14 February 2012 07:07, Robert Bradshaw <robertwb at math.washington.edu> wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Vitja Makarov <vitja.makarov at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2012/2/12 Vitja Makarov <vitja.makarov at gmail.com>:
>>>> 2012/2/11 Robert Bradshaw <robertwb at math.washington.edu>:
>>>>> All of Sage passes except for one test:
>>>>>
>>>>> sage -t  devel/sage/sage/misc/sageinspect.py
>>>>> **********************************************************************
>>>>> File "/levi/scratch/robertwb/hudson/sage-4.8/devel/sage-main/sage/misc/sageinspect.py",
>>>>> line 970:
>>>>>    sage: sage_getargspec(bernstein_polynomial_factory_ratlist.coeffs_bitsize)
>>>>> Expected:
>>>>>    ArgSpec(args=['self'], varargs=None, keywords=None, defaults=None)
>>>>> Got:
>>>>>    ArgSpec(args=['self'], varargs=None, keywords=None, defaults=())
>>>>> **********************************************************************
>>>>> File "/levi/scratch/robertwb/hudson/sage-4.8/devel/sage-main/sage/misc/sageinspect.py",
>>>>> line 973:
>>>>>    sage: sage_getargspec(BooleanMonomialMonoid.gen)
>>>>> Expected:
>>>>>    ArgSpec(args=['self', 'i'], varargs=None, keywords=None, defaults=(0,))
>>>>> Got:
>>>>>    ArgSpec(args=['self', 'i'], varargs=None, keywords=None, defaults=())
>>>>> **********************************************************************
>>>>> 1 items had failures:
>>>>>   2 of  31 in __main__.example_21
>>>>> ***Test Failed*** 2 failures.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any ideas why this would have changed?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> CyFunction now provides its own code object. So inspect.getargs() is
>>>> called instead of
>>>> inspect.ArgSpec(*_sage_getargspec_cython(sage_getsource(obj))). It
>>>> seems like func.func_defaults should be implemented.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've created a pull request:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/cython/cython/pull/88
>>
>> Thanks! The only other thing I can think of was a question of using
>> caching to mitigate the longer compile times, but I can't remember if
>> this was resolved.
>
> The compiler has like 2 or 3 seconds of constant overhead if you use
> memoryviews.

That'd be nice to cut down, but certainly not a blocker.

>> As I'm going to be MIA any day now, someone else should take up the
>> banner to push this long awaited release.
>
> "Missing in action"? Are you planning to desert? :) I can't find any
> relevant abbreviation, but I think I know what it means,
> congratulations in advance.

Twin boys coming any day now!

> Stefan, you have been involved the longest, would you feel up to the
> task? You probably have the best understanding and experience with any
> issues (no pressure :). Otherwise I could have a try...

It's pretty easy. Once the defaults change is in it's probably worth
cutting a beta or release candidate to email to dev/users, and if
there's no blocking feedback you go ahead and push it out (basically
writing up the release notes on the wiki, cleaning up trac, tagging
the repository, making sure everything we care about on hudson is
still passing, uploading to pypi and the website (the sdist tarball),
emailing our lists and python-announce, re-building and updating the
pointer to the documentation, ...) If it goes on for a while it's
worth making/using a release branch on github.

- Robert