Hi all, I'm just reposting here to see if anyone with a stake in f2py has an opinion/advice on the points below. F2py feels very much in autopilot/drifting into the icebergs mode right now. Is that correct assessment?
If there's any guidance on where to go, I can at least file tickets on these points, but I don't want to create unnecessary tickets on trac if others feel the current situation is satisfactory and it's just me who is confused. Cheers, f On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Fernando Perez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Howdy, > > today's exercise with f2py left some lessons learned, mostly thanks to > Robert's excellent help, for which I'm grateful. > > I'd like to recap here what we have, mostly to decide what changes (if > any) should go into numpy to make the experience less "interesting" > for future users: > > - Remove the f2py_options flag from > numpy.distutils.extension.Extension? If so, do options like > '--debug_capi' get correctly passed via setup.cfg? > > This flag is potentially very confusing, because only *some* f2py > options get actually set this way, while others need to be set in > calls to config_fc. > > - How to properly set the compiler options in a setup.py file? Robert > suggested the setup.cfg file, but this doesn't get picked up unless > config_fc is explicitly called by the user: > > ./setup.py config_fc etc... > > This is perhaps a distutils problem, but I don't know if we can > solve it more cleanly. It seems to me that it should be possible to > provide a setup.py file that can be used simply as > > ./setup.py install > > (with the necessary setup.cfg file sitting next to it). I'm thinking > here of what we need to do when showing how 'easy' these tools are > for scientists migrating from matlab, for example. Obscure, special > purpose incantations tend to tarnish our message of ease :) > > - Should the 'instead' word be removed from the f2py docs regarding > the use of .pyf sources? It appears to be a mistake, which threw at > least me for a loop for a while. > > - Why does f2py in the source tree have *both* a doc/ and a docs/ > directory? It's really confusing to see this. > > f2py happens to be a very important tool, not just because scipy > couldn't build without it, but also to position python as a credible > integration language for scientific work. So I hope we can make using > it as easy and robust as is technically feasible. > > Cheers, > > f > _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
