Fernando Perez wrote: > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Gael Varoquaux > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 04:20:28PM -0700, Robert Kern wrote: >> > I'm not sure how it could. It's example code, not part of numpy itself. >> >> OK, maybe I should keep my 2 cents. They appear to be forged money, and >> worth nothing. >> >> :-). >> > > I *could* make it pyrex/cython-valid, it's trivial but just adds noise > IMHO... As Stefan said, pyrex is essentially unmaintained as far as > publicly-visible development goes, while cython is very actively > moving ahead and likely picking up better numpy support soon (thanks > to Dag and other GSoC work), so why not just follow that? > I say just add it. We should move forward with Cython. More important is to see if random actually builds with Cython right now. There was an issue that I recall from a few weeks ago that Cython could not build the pyrex extension in NumPy.
-Travis _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
