[Numpy-discussion] Recent umath changes

[Charles R Harris]

On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 9:12 PM, David Cournapeau <cournape at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Chuck,
>
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 2:15 AM, Charles R Harris
> <charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The undefs need to be there when the functions are defined by numpy, so
> they
> > only need to be in the same #if block as those definitions. I moved them
> out
> > to cover the function declarations also, but if those are put in their
> own
> > block for SPARC then they aren't needed.
>
> But then it just hides the problem instead of solving it. If we are in
> the #if bloc and the symbol is defined, it is a bug in the
> configuration stage, it should be dealt there - if it is a bug in the
> toolchain (say the symbol is in the library, but not declared in the
> header), then it should be dealt with for that exact platform only.
>
> It is not nit-picking, because the later way means it won't break any
> other platform :) It still should be used sparingly, though (the SPARC
> problem is a good example where it should be used).
>

True, it should be solved in the configuration stage, but what if it isn't?
I suppose an error message might be the desired result. If you want to
remove the undefs to see what happens, that's fine with me. They were
inherited from the old code in any case.

Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20081219/351c267d/attachment.html>