[Numpy-discussion] Merging new (optional) build system in the trunk ?

[David Cournapeau]

Travis E. Oliphant wrote:
> David Cournapeau wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>     I would appreciate to get some comment on whether there is any 
>> chance to get my numpy.scons branch merge into the trunk at some near 
>> future. I feel to have reached the point where the only big thing 
>> missing is more testing. I tried to test it on many platforms, but there 
>> is a limit to what I can test just by myself. The branch has been 
>> conceived such as by default, the current numpy.distutils is used to 
>> build, and the scons-based build is used only by explicit request 
>> (another setup.py), so this does not force any use now: except the work 
>> related to numpyconfig (which can be tested separately, since it was 
>> done in a different branch, and is only a few lines of code), everything 
>> else is exactly the same than before.
>>   
>
> I think there is a chance.  I'm generally favorable to the idea.  I was 
> mainly waiting for the 1.0.4 release.  I think we should be able to 
> merge it over now if there are no serious objections. 
Ok, great. Just tell me when you want to merge it, because I did a few 
things to make testing on the buildbot  easier:
    - I inverted the old and new setup.py (to be able to test my branch 
on the buildbot).
    - There is also some debugging on by default, which should be 
disabled in the trunk.
This ia a 2 second change, but just to avoid any surprises for people 
regularly using the trunk

Also, what is the timeline for 1.0.5 ? Ideally, once the scons work is 
merged into the trunk, I would like to work on a scipy branch which uses 
scons, so that both numpy and scipy next (1.0.5 and 0.7 ?) releases can 
both be built using scons.
>
> I'm also interested in moving scipy.weave into numpy (without the blitz 
> converters which will stay in scipy).  
>
> For 1.0.5, I would also like to see aligned memory and some steps 
> towards optimization using intrinsics.
Are you speaking about SIMD intrisics ?

cheers,

David