[Numpy-discussion] Request for comments on a new setup.py for Numeric
oliphant at ee.byu.edu
Wed Apr 6 16:13:08 EDT 2005
David M. Cooke wrote:
>Travis Oliphant <oliphant at ee.byu.edu> writes:
>>David M. Cooke wrote:
>>>I've always found the Numeric setup.py to be not very user-friendly.
>>>So, I rewrote it. It's available as patch #1178095
>>>Basically, all the editing you need to do is in customize.py, instead
>>>of touching setup.py. No more commenting out files for lapack_lite
>>>(just tell it to use the system LAPACK, and tell it where to find it).
>>>Also, you could now use GSL's cblas interface for dotblas. Useful if
>>>you've already taken the trouble to link that with an optimized
>>>I didn't want to just through this into CVS without feedback first :-)
>>>If it looks good, this can go in Numeric 24.0.
>>I like the new changes. I also think the setup.py file is unfriendly.
>>Put them in...
>While I'm at it, I'm also thinking of writing a 'cblas_lite' for
>dotblas. This would mean that dotblas would be enabled all the time.
>You could use a C BLAS if you've got one (from ATLAS, say), or a
>Fortran BLAS (like the cxml library on an Alpha running Tru64), or it
>would use the existing blas_lite.c if you don't.
This is a good idea, but for more than just dotblas.
It is the essential problem that must be solved to make scipy.base
installable everywhere yet use fast libraries for users who have them
without much fuss.
More information about the NumPy-Discussion