Thanks for helpful feedback! Update: > From skimming this, it looks pretty good, although I worry that some > of the time estimates may be overly optimistic. I'd strongly consider > figuring out which of these you consider most important and > concentrating on doing one or two well and then doing the rest if time > allows.
I ended up hinting that the phase seperation will be a joint effort (it really must be, and at least Robert and Stefan has voiced approval of getting this done) and should be done within the end of dev1 (which I hope to attend) or I will go for the backup plan (Of course I'll get this somehow confirmed by Robert before I deliver it - Robert?) Then I made the performance optimization part an optional bonus. The significant part is then really only about parametrized types, overloading and function templates, which should be possible to aim for I feel. Though it might still look much, I don't know. This is really a sacrifice of the best possible NumPy support to the advantage of generic Cython development. The only way to be positively certain of having excellent NumPy support within the timeframe is plan B, but I've got signals that NumPy-only code isn't what is wanted. > I also strongly encourage you to drop by the Sage IRC channel > at #sage on irc.freenode.net if your interested in discussing it in > more detail I would, but I just don't have time (as in, I don't have time even if it breaks my SoC). Also note that I will primarily apply through the Python Foundation. Dag Sverre _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
