[Numpy-discussion] numpy 2.0, what else to do?

[Charles R Harris]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 8:13 PM, David Cournapeau <david at silveregg.co.jp>wrote:

> Charles R Harris wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Charles R Harris
> > <charlesr.harris at gmail.com <mailto:charlesr.harris at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >     On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 3:34 PM, David Cournapeau
> >     <cournape at gmail.com <mailto:cournape at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >         On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 7:04 AM, Charles R Harris
> >         <charlesr.harris at gmail.com <mailto:charlesr.harris at gmail.com>>
> >         wrote:
> >          >
> >          >
> >          > On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 2:46 PM, David Cournapeau
> >         <cournape at gmail.com <mailto:cournape at gmail.com>>
> >          > wrote:
> >          >>
> >          >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 4:08 AM, Charles R Harris
> >          >> <charlesr.harris at gmail.com
> >         <mailto:charlesr.harris at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >          >>
> >          >> >
> >          >> > I was wondering about that. Why do we have a private
> >         include directory?
> >          >> > Would it make more sense to move it to
> >         core/include/numpy/private.
> >          >>
> >          >> No, the whole point is to avoid other packages to include
> >         that by
> >          >> mistake, to avoid namespace pollution.
> >          >
> >          > Isn't that what the npy prefix is for?
> >
> >         No, npy_ is for public symbols. Anything in private should be
> >         private :)
> >
> >          > In any case, if it needs to be at a
> >          > higher level for easy inclusion, then it should move up.
> >
> >         It is not that easy - we should avoid putting this code into
> >         core/include, because then we have to keep it compatible across
> >         releases, but there is no easy way to share headers between
> modules
> >         without making it public.
> >
> >
> >     Py_TYPE, Py_Size, etc. are unlikely to cause compatibility problems
> >     across releases.
> >
> >
> >
> > In particular, I think
> >
> > #if (PY_VERSION_HEX < 0x02060000)
> > #define Py_TYPE(o)    (((PyObject*)(o))->ob_type)
> > #define Py_REFCNT(o)  (((PyObject*)(o))->ob_refcnt)
> > #define Py_SIZE(o)    (((PyVarObject*)(o))->ob_size)
> > #endif
> >
> > belongs somewhere near the top, maybe with a prefix (cython seems to
> > define them also)
>
> The rule is easy: one should put in core/include/numpy whatever is
> public, and put in private what is not.
>
> Note that defining those macros above publicly is very likely to cause
> trouble because I am sure other people do define those macros, without
> caring about polluting the namespace as well. Given that it is
> temporary, and is small, I think copying the compat header is better
> than making it public, the best solution being to add something in
> distutils to share it between submodules,
>
>
You would prefer to fix the macros in ndarrayobject.h using #ifdef's then?

Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20100215/31aff323/attachment.html>