Re: [Numpy-discussion] A minor milestone

[Hans Dembinski]

> On 7. Sep 2018, at 06:33, Nathaniel Smith  wrote:
> 
> Looking at https://pypistats.org/packages/numpy , it appears that
> August 24 was the last day when numpy had more Python 2 downloads than
> Python 3 downloads (maybe ever?).

Good news, it is about time.

Just out of curiosity, what happened after Jul 27, when the downloads doubled?


___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] A minor milestone

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 1:19 AM, Hans Dembinski  wrote:
>
>> On 7. Sep 2018, at 06:33, Nathaniel Smith  wrote:
>>
>> Looking at https://pypistats.org/packages/numpy , it appears that
>> August 24 was the last day when numpy had more Python 2 downloads than
>> Python 3 downloads (maybe ever?).
>
> Good news, it is about time.
>
> Just out of curiosity, what happened after Jul 27, when the downloads doubled?

It turns out the original version of the statistics aggregation
program crashed constantly and lost tons of data. Donald Stufft
rewrote it (using my library trio :-)), and deployed it on July 26:

  https://github.com/pypa/linehaul/issues/30

So the old download stats are artifactually low, and from July 26 the
stats are accurate.

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] A minor milestone

[Charles R Harris]

On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 2:31 AM Nathaniel Smith  wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 1:19 AM, Hans Dembinski 
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 7. Sep 2018, at 06:33, Nathaniel Smith  wrote:
> >>
> >> Looking at https://pypistats.org/packages/numpy , it appears that
> >> August 24 was the last day when numpy had more Python 2 downloads than
> >> Python 3 downloads (maybe ever?).
> >
> > Good news, it is about time.
> >
> > Just out of curiosity, what happened after Jul 27, when the downloads
> doubled?
>
> It turns out the original version of the statistics aggregation
> program crashed constantly and lost tons of data. Donald Stufft
> rewrote it (using my library trio :-)), and deployed it on July 26:
>
>   https://github.com/pypa/linehaul/issues/30
>
> So the old download stats are artifactually low, and from July 26 the
> stats are accurate.
>
>
Thanks for the link. It would be nice to improve the Windows numbers, Linux
is still very dominant. I suppose that might be an artifact of the systems
used by developers as opposed to end users. It would be a different open
source world if Microsoft had always released their compilers for free and
kept them current with the evolving ISO specs.

Chuck
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

[Numpy-discussion] C99

[Charles R Harris]

Hi All,

I've a PR up converting travis testing to use C99
. I suspect we may not want to
merge it for a while, but it does raise a couple of style questions that we
should probably settle up front. Namely:


   - Should we allow // style comments
   - Should we allow variable declarations after code

I am sure there are others to consider that haven't occurred to me. I
confess that I am not a big fan of allowing either, but am probably
prejudiced by early familiarity with C89 and long years working to that
spec.

Thoughts?

Chuck
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] A minor milestone

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 6:33 PM, Charles R Harris
 wrote:
> Thanks for the link. It would be nice to improve the Windows numbers, Linux
> is still very dominant. I suppose that might be an artifact of the systems
> used by developers as opposed to end users. It would be a different open
> source world if Microsoft had always released their compilers for free and
> kept them current with the evolving ISO specs.

Well, keep in mind also that it's counting installs, not users...
people destroy and reinstall Linux systems a *lot* more often than
they do Windows/macOS systems, what with clouds and containers and CI
systems and all. On my personal laptop I install numpy maybe once per
release, but on Travis I install it half a dozen times every day.

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] A minor milestone

[Andrew Nelson]

>  but on Travis I install it half a dozen times every day.

Good point. I wonder if there's any way to take that into account when
considering whether to drop versions.

On Sat, 8 Sep 2018 at 15:14, Nathaniel Smith  wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 6:33 PM, Charles R Harris
>  wrote:
> > Thanks for the link. It would be nice to improve the Windows numbers,
> Linux
> > is still very dominant. I suppose that might be an artifact of the
> systems
> > used by developers as opposed to end users. It would be a different open
> > source world if Microsoft had always released their compilers for free
> and
> > kept them current with the evolving ISO specs.
>
> Well, keep in mind also that it's counting installs, not users...
> people destroy and reinstall Linux systems a *lot* more often than
> they do Windows/macOS systems, what with clouds and containers and CI
> systems and all. On my personal laptop I install numpy maybe once per
> release, but on Travis I install it half a dozen times every day.
>
> -n
>
> --
> Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
> ___
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>


-- 
_
Dr. Andrew Nelson


_
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Re: [Numpy-discussion] C99

[Eric Wieser]

Thanks for the first step on this!

Should we allow // style comments

I don’t think it matters too much. I think it might be a little messy to
have a mix of the two styles where // means “post py3” and /* */ means
pre-py3 - but at the same time, I do slightly prefer the C++-style. For C
contributors coming from python, I’d expect that it feels more natural to
only have to put a comment marker at the start of the line. We could
convert the /**/-style to //-style with a tool, but it’s probably not worth
the churn or time.

Should we allow variable declarations after code

I’d be very strongly in favor of this - it makes it much easier to extract
helper functions if variables are declared as late as they can be - plus it
make it easier to reason about early returns not needing goto fail.

Related to this feature, I think allowing for(int i = 0; i < N; i++) is a
clear win.

Eric

On Fri, 7 Sep 2018 at 18:56 Charles R Harris charlesr.har...@gmail.com
 wrote:

Hi All,
>
> I've a PR up converting travis testing to use C99
> . I suspect we may not want to
> merge it for a while, but it does raise a couple of style questions that we
> should probably settle up front. Namely:
>
>
>- Should we allow // style comments
>- Should we allow variable declarations after code
>
> I am sure there are others to consider that haven't occurred to me. I
> confess that I am not a big fan of allowing either, but am probably
> prejudiced by early familiarity with C89 and long years working to that
> spec.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Chuck
> ___
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>
​
___
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion