[Cython] Status for 0.11

[Michael Abshoff]

Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On Feb 21, 2009, at 8:00 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:

Hi Robert,

>>
>> (Of course, statistics is fun.)
> 
> Yes, there's a lot of duplicates
> 
> Robert-Bradshaws-Laptop:~/sage/sage-cython/devel/sage robert$ cat  
> test.log | grep "Acquired on lines" | sort | uniq | wc
>        25     367    2431
> 
> Robert-Bradshaws-Laptop:~/sage/sage-cython/devel/sage robert$ cat  
> test.log | grep "sage/.*: " | sort | uniq
>      sage/libs/pari/gen.c: _normalize_slice()
>      sage/libs/singular/singular.cpp: sa2si_ZZ()
>      sage/matrix/misc.c: matrix_rational_echelon_form_multimodular()
>      sage/rings/polynomial/multi_polynomial_libsingular.cpp: subs()
> 
> Which, not surprisingly, are the "usual suspects" for memory leaks. I  
> haven't hit sage/rings yet though, which may turn up a lot more.


Yep, the best strategy here after having run the complete test suite 
once for the "horrible before-picure" is likely to start with coercion 
and structure and then work your way through rings before then looking 
at what is left over. There are some other leaks not in the test suite I 
would like to examine with this once the noise from the low level stuff 
has been quited. Please let me know what I can do on my end to make 
Cython 0.11 happen faster since I cannot wait for it to be in an 
official Sage release. I am expecting similar miracles as from the 
0.10.3 Cython release which already fixed on bad, bad reference count 
related leak issue :)

Note that Sage 3.3 even with the patch from Sage's Cython 0.11 trac 
ticket applied does not compile with yesterday's Cython devel head and I 
did put the failure into a comment on that ticket. It was basically that 
Cython did throw an error for

  typedef unsigned long ulong

in the FLINT header.

Cheers,

Michael