Hi Dag 2009/3/12 Dag Sverre Seljebotn <da...@student.matnat.uio.no>: > (First off, is it OK to continue polling the NumPy list now and then on > Cython language decisions? Or should I expect that any interested Cython > users follow the Cython list?)
Given that many of the subscribers make use of the NumPy support in Cython, I don't think they would mind; I, for one, don't. > In Python, if I write "-1 % 5", I get 4. However, in C if I write "-1 % > 5" I get -1. The question is, what should I get in Cython if I write (a > % b) where a and b are cdef ints? Should I > > [ ] Get 4, because it should behave just like in Python, avoiding > surprises when adding types to existing algorithms (this will require > extra logic and be a bit slower) I'd much prefer this option. When students struggle to get their code faster, my advice to them is: "run it to Cython, and if you are still not happy, start tweaking this and that". It would be much harder to take that route if you had to take a number of exceptional behaviours into account. > (Orthogonal to this, we can introduce compiler directives to change the > meaning of the operator from the default in a code blocks, and/or make > special functions for the semantics that are not chosen as default.) In my experience, keeping the rules simple has a big benefit (the "programmer's brain cache" can only hold a small number of items -- a very good analogy made by Fernando Perez), so I would prefer not to have this option. Regards Stéfan _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion