By Eric Jones eric@enthought.com
locals()
The weave
package provides tools for including C/C++ code within
in Python code. This offers both another level of optimization to those who need
it, and an easy way to modify and extend any supported extension libraries such
as wxPython and hopefully VTK soon. Inlining C/C++ code within Python generally
results in speed ups of 1.5x to 30x speed-up over algorithms written in pure
Python (However, it is also possible to slow things down...). Generally
algorithms that require a large number of calls to the Python API don't benefit
as much from the conversion to C/C++ as algorithms that have inner loops
completely convertable to C.
There are three basic ways to use weave
. The
weave.inline()
function executes C code directly within Python,
and weave.blitz()
translates Python Numeric expressions to C++
for fast execution. blitz()
was the original reason
weave
was built. For those interested in building extension
libraries, the ext_tools
module provides classes for building
extension modules within Python.
Most of weave's
functionality should work on Windows and Unix,
although some of its functionality requires gcc
or a similarly
modern C++ compiler that handles templates well. Up to now, most testing has
been done on Windows 2000 with Microsoft's C++ compiler (MSVC) and with gcc
(mingw32 2.95.2 and 2.95.3-6). All tests also pass on Linux (RH 7.1
with gcc 2.96), and I've had reports that it works on Debian also (thanks
Pearu).
The inline
and blitz
provide new functionality to
Python (although I've recently learned about the PyInline project which may offer
similar functionality to inline
). On the other hand, tools for
building Python extension modules already exists (SWIG, SIP, pycpp, CXX, and
others). As of yet, I'm not sure where weave
fits in this
spectrum. It is closest in flavor to CXX in that it makes creating new C/C++
extension modules pretty easy. However, if you're wrapping a gaggle of legacy
functions or classes, SWIG and friends are definitely the better choice.
weave
is set up so that you can customize how Python types are
converted to C types in weave
. This is great for
inline()
, but, for wrapping legacy code, it is more flexible to
specify things the other way around -- that is how C types map to Python types.
This weave
does not do. I guess it would be possible to build
such a tool on top of weave
, but with good tools like SWIG around,
I'm not sure the effort produces any new capabilities. Things like function
overloading are probably easily implemented in weave
and it might
be easier to mix Python/C code in function calls, but nothing beyond this comes
to mind. So, if you're developing new extension modules or optimizing Python
functions in C, weave.ext_tools()
might be the tool
for you. If you're wrapping legacy code, stick with SWIG.
The next several sections give the basics of how to use weave
.
We'll discuss what's happening under the covers in more detail later
on. Serious users will need to at least look at the type conversion section to
understand how Python variables map to C/C++ types and how to customize this
behavior. One other note. If you don't know C or C++ then these docs are
probably of very little help to you. Further, it'd be helpful if you know
something about writing Python extensions. weave
does quite a
bit for you, but for anything complex, you'll need to do some conversions,
reference counting, etc.
Note: weave
is actually part of the SciPy package. However, it works fine as a
standalone package. The examples here are given as if it is used as a stand
alone package. If you are using from within scipy, you can use from
scipy import weave
and the examples will work identically.
I use 2.1.1. Probably 2.0 or higher should work.
weave
uses distutils
to actually build
extension modules, so it uses whatever compiler was originally used to
build Python. weave
itself requires a C++ compiler. If
you used a C++ compiler to build Python, your probably fine.
On Unix gcc is the preferred choice because I've done a little
testing with it. All testing has been done with gcc, but I expect the
majority of compilers should work for inline
and
ext_tools
. The one issue I'm not sure about is that I've
hard coded things so that compilations are linked with the
stdc++
library. Is this standard across
Unix compilers, or is this a gcc-ism?
For blitz()
, you'll need a reasonably recent version of
gcc. 2.95.2 works on windows and 2.96 looks fine on Linux. Other
versions are likely to work. Its likely that KAI's C++ compiler and
maybe some others will work, but I haven't tried. My advice is to use
gcc for now unless your willing to tinker with the code some.
On Windows, either MSVC or gcc ( mingw32) should work. Again,
you'll need gcc for blitz()
as the
MSVC compiler doesn't handle templates well.
I have not tried Cygwin, so please report success if it works for you.
The python Numeric module from here. is required for
blitz()
to work. Be sure and get NumPy, not NumArray
which is the "next generation" implementation. This is not
required for using inline()
or ext_tools
.
weave
)
These two modules are packaged with weave
in both
the windows installer and the source distributions. If you are using
CVS, however, you'll need to download these separately (also available
through CVS at SciPy).
There are currently two ways to get weave
. Fist,
weave
is part of SciPy and installed automatically (as a sub-
package) whenever SciPy is installed (although the latest version isn't in
SciPy yet, so use this one for now). Second, since weave
is
useful outside of the scientific community, it has been setup so that it can be
used as a stand-alone module.
The stand-alone version can be downloaded from here. Unix users should grab the tar ball (.tgz file) and install it using the following commands.
This will also install two other packages,tar -xzvf weave-0.2.tar.gz cd weave-0.2 python setup.py install
scipy_distutils
and
scipy_test
. The first is needed by the setup process itself and
both are used in the unit-testing process. Numeric is required if you want to
use blitz()
, but isn't necessary for inline()
or
ext_tools
For Windows users, it's even easier. You can download the click-install .exe file and run it for automatic installation. There is also a .zip file of the source for those interested. It also includes a setup.py file to simplify installation.
If you're using the CVS version, you'll need to install
scipy_distutils
and scipy_test
packages (also
available from CVS) on your own.
Note: The dependency issue here is a little sticky. I hate to make people download more than one file (and so I haven't), but distutils doesn't have a way to do conditional installation -- at least that I know about. This can lead to undesired clobbering of the scipy_test and scipy_distutils modules. What to do, what to do... Right now it is a very minor issue.
weave
is installed, fire up python and run its unit tests.
This takes a loooong time. On windows, it is usually several minutes. On Unix with remote file systems, I've had it take 15 or so minutes. In the end, it should run about 180 tests and spew some speed results along the way. If you get errors, they'll be reported at the end of the output. Please let me know what if this occurs. If you don't have Numeric installed, you'll get some module import errors during the test setup phase for modules that are Numeric specific (blitz_spec, blitz_tools, size_check, standard_array_spec, ast_tools), but all test should pass (about 100 and they should complete in several minutes).>>> import weave >>> weave.test() runs long time... spews tons of output and a few warnings . . . .............................................................. ................................................................ .................................................. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 184 tests in 158.418s OK
>>>
If you only want to test a single module of the package, you can do this by running test() for that specific module.
Testing Notes:>>> import weave.scalar_spec >>> weave.scalar_spec.test() ....... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 7 tests in 23.284s
I've had some test fail on windows machines where I have msvc, gcc-2.95.2 (in c:\gcc-2.95.2), and gcc-2.95.3-6 (in c:\gcc) all installed. My environment has c:\gcc in the path and does not have c:\gcc-2.95.2 in the path. The test process runs very smoothly until the end where several test using gcc fail with cpp0 not found by g++. If I check os.system('gcc -v') before running tests, I get gcc-2.95.3-6. If I check after running tests (and after failure), I get gcc-2.95.2. ??huh??. The os.environ['PATH'] still has c:\gcc first in it and is not corrupted (msvc/distutils messes with the environment variables, so we have to undo its work in some places). If anyone else sees this, let me know - - it may just be an quirk on my machine (unlikely). Testing with the gcc- 2.95.2 installation always works.
If you run the tests from PythonWin or some other GUI tool, you'll get a
ton of DOS windows popping up periodically as weave
spawns
the compiler multiple times. Very annoying. Anyone know how to fix this?
wxPython tests are not enabled by default because importing wxPython on a Unix machine without access to a X-term will cause the program to exit. Anyone know of a safe way to detect whether wxPython can be imported and whether a display exists on a machine?
weave/example
directory and also from the test scripts. Without more information about what
the test actually do, their value is limited. Still, their here for the
curious. Look at the example scripts for more specifics about what problem was
actually solved by each run. These examples are run under windows 2000 using
Microsoft Visual C++ and python2.1 on a 850 MHz PIII laptop with 320 MB of RAM.
Speed up is the improvement (degredation) factor of weave
compared to
conventional Python functions. The blitz()
comparisons are shown
compared to Numeric.
inline and ext_tools | |
Algorithm | Speed up |
binary search | 1.50 |
fibonacci (recursive) | 82.10 |
fibonacci (loop) | 9.17 |
return None | 0.14 |
map | 1.20 |
dictionary sort | 2.54 |
vector quantization | 37.40 |
blitz -- double precision | |
Algorithm | Speed up |
a = b + c 512x512 | 3.05 |
a = b + c + d 512x512 | 4.59 |
5 pt avg. filter, 2D Image 512x512 | 9.01 |
Electromagnetics (FDTD) 100x100x100 | 8.61 |
The benchmarks shown blitz
in the best possible light. Numeric
(at least on my machine) is significantly worse for double precision than it is
for single precision calculations. If your interested in single precision
results, you can pretty much divide the double precision speed up by 3 and you'll
be close.
inline()
compiles and executes C/C++ code on the fly. Variables
in the local and global Python scope are also available in the C/C++ code.
Values are passed to the C/C++ code by assignment much like variables
are passed into a standard Python function. Values are returned from the C/C++
code through a special argument called return_val. Also, the contents of
mutable objects can be changed within the C/C++ code and the changes remain
after the C code exits and returns to Python. (more on this later)
Here's a trivial printf
example using inline()
:
>>> import weave >>> a = 1 >>> weave.inline('printf("%d\\n",a);',['a']) 1
In this, its most basic form, inline(c_code, var_list)
requires two
arguments. c_code
is a string of valid C/C++ code.
var_list
is a list of variable names that are passed from
Python into C/C++. Here we have a simple printf
statement that
writes the Python variable a
to the screen. The first time you run
this, there will be a pause while the code is written to a .cpp file, compiled
into an extension module, loaded into Python, cataloged for future use, and
executed. On windows (850 MHz PIII), this takes about 1.5 seconds when using
Microsoft's C++ compiler (MSVC) and 6-12 seconds using gcc (mingw32 2.95.2).
All subsequent executions of the code will happen very quickly because the code
only needs to be compiled once. If you kill and restart the interpreter and then
execute the same code fragment again, there will be a much shorter delay in the
fractions of seconds range. This is because weave
stores a
catalog of all previously compiled functions in an on disk cache. When it sees
a string that has been compiled, it loads the already compiled module and
executes the appropriate function.
Note: If you try the printf
example in a GUI shell such as IDLE,
PythonWin, PyShell, etc., you're unlikely to see the output. This is because the
C code is writing to stdout, instead of to the GUI window. This doesn't mean
that inline doesn't work in these environments -- it only means that standard
out in C is not the same as the standard out for Python in these cases. Non
input/output functions will work as expected.
Although effort has been made to reduce the overhead associated with calling
inline, it is still less efficient for simple code snippets than using
equivalent Python code. The simple printf
example is actually
slower by 30% or so than using Python print
statement. And, it is
not difficult to create code fragments that are 8-10 times slower using inline
than equivalent Python. However, for more complicated algorithms,
the speed up can be worth while -- anywhwere from 1.5- 30 times faster.
Algorithms that have to manipulate Python objects (sorting a list) usually only
see a factor of 2 or so improvement. Algorithms that are highly computational
or manipulate Numeric arrays can see much larger improvements. The
examples/vq.py file shows a factor of 30 or more improvement on the vector
quantization algorithm that is used heavily in information theory and
classification problems.
MSVC users will actually see a bit of compiler output that distutils does not supress the first time the code executes:
>>> weave.inline(r'printf("%d\n",a);',['a']) sc_e013937dbc8c647ac62438874e5795131.cpp Creating library C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp \Release\sc_e013937dbc8c647ac62438874e5795131.lib and object C:\DOCUME ~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\sc_e013937dbc8c64 7ac62438874e5795131.exp 1
Nothing bad is happening, its just a bit annoying. Anyone know how to turn this off?
This example also demonstrates using 'raw strings'. The r
preceeding the code string in the last example denotes that this is a 'raw
string'. In raw strings, the backslash character is not interpreted as an
escape character, and so it isn't necessary to use a double backslash to
indicate that the '\n' is meant to be interpreted in the C printf
statement instead of by Python. If your C code contains a lot
of strings and control characters, raw strings might make things easier.
Most of the time, however, standard strings work just as well.
The printf
statement in these examples is formatted to print
out integers. What happens if a
is a string? inline
will happily, compile a new version of the code to accept strings as input,
and execute the code. The result?
>>> a = 'string' >>> weave.inline(r'printf("%d\n",a);',['a']) 32956972
In this case, the result is non-sensical, but also non-fatal. In other
situations, it might produce a compile time error because a
is
required to be an integer at some point in the code, or it could produce a
segmentation fault. Its possible to protect against passing
inline
arguments of the wrong data type by using asserts in
Python.
>>> a = 'string' >>> def protected_printf(a): ... assert(type(a) == type(1)) ... weave.inline(r'printf("%d\n",a);',['a']) >>> protected_printf(1) 1 >>> protected_printf('string') AssertError...
For printing strings, the format statement needs to be changed. Also, weave doesn't convert strings to char*. Instead it uses CXX Py::String type, so you have to do a little more work. Here we convert it to a C++ std::string and then ask cor the char* version.
>>> a = 'string' >>> weave.inline(r'printf("%s\n",std::string(a).c_str());',['a']) string
This is a little convoluted. Perhaps strings should convert to std::string objects instead of CXX objects. Or maybe to char*.
As in this case, C/C++ code fragments often have to change to accept different
types. For the given printing task, however, C++ streams provide a way of a
single statement that works for integers and strings. By default, the stream
objects live in the std (standard) namespace and thus require the use of
std::
.
>>> weave.inline('std::cout << a << std::endl;',['a']) 1 >>> a = 'string' >>> weave.inline('std::cout << a << std::endl;',['a']) string
Examples using printf
and cout
are included in
examples/print_example.py.
inline
. It
includes a few algorithms from the Python Cookbook
that have been re-written in inline C to improve speed as well as a couple
examples using Numeric and wxPython.
This Python version works for arbitrary Python data types. The C version below is specialized to handle integer values. There is a little type checking done in Python to assure that we're working with the correct data types before heading into C. The variablesdef binary_search(seq, t): min = 0; max = len(seq) - 1 while 1: if max < min: return -1 m = (min + max) / 2 if seq[m] < t: min = m + 1 elif seq[m] > t: max = m - 1 else: return m
seq
and t
don't need to be
declared beacuse weave
handles converting and declaring them in
the C code. All other temporary variables such as min, max
, etc.
must be declared -- it is C after all. Here's the new mixed Python/C function:
def c_int_binary_search(seq,t): # do a little type checking in Python assert(type(t) == type(1)) assert(type(seq) == type([])) # now the C code code = """ #line 29 "binary_search.py" int val, m, min = 0; int max = seq.length() - 1; PyObject *py_val; for(;;) { if (max < min ) { return_val = Py::new_reference_to(Py::Int(-1)); break; } m = (min + max) /2; val = py_to_int(PyList_GetItem(seq.ptr(),m),"val"); if (val < t) min = m + 1; else if (val > t) max = m - 1; else { return_val = Py::new_reference_to(Py::Int(m)); break; } } """ return inline(code,['seq','t'])
We have two variables seq
and t
passed in.
t
is guaranteed (by the assert
) to be an integer.
Python integers are converted to C int types in the transition from Python to
C. seq
is a Python list. By default, it is translated to a CXX
list object. Full documentation for the CXX library can be found at its website. The basics are that the CXX
provides C++ class equivalents for Python objects that simplify, or at
least object orientify, working with Python objects in C/C++. For example,
seq.length()
returns the length of the list. A little more about
CXX and its class methods, etc. is in the ** type conversions ** section.
Note: CXX uses templates and therefore may be a little less portable than another alternative by Gordan McMillan called SCXX which was inspired by CXX. It doesn't use templates so it should compile faster and be more portable. SCXX has a few less features, but it appears to me that it would mesh with the needs of weave quite well. Hopefully xxx_spec files will be written for SCXX in the future, and we'll be able to compare on a more empirical basis. Both sets of spec files will probably stick around, it just a question of which becomes the default.
Most of the algorithm above looks similar in C to the original Python code.
There are two main differences. The first is the setting of
return_val
instead of directly returning from the C code with a
return
statement. return_val
is an automatically
defined variable of type PyObject*
that is returned from the C
code back to Python. You'll have to handle reference counting issues when
setting this variable. In this example, CXX classes and functions handle the
dirty work. All CXX functions and classes live in the namespace
Py::
. The following code converts the integer m
to a
CXX Int()
object and then to a PyObject*
with an
incremented reference count using Py::new_reference_to()
.
return_val = Py::new_reference_to(Py::Int(m));
The second big differences shows up in the retrieval of integer values from the
Python list. The simple Python seq[i]
call balloons into a C
Python API call to grab the value out of the list and then a separate call to
py_to_int()
that converts the PyObject* to an integer.
py_to_int()
includes both a NULL cheack and a
PyInt_Check()
call as well as the conversion call. If either of
the checks fail, an exception is raised. The entire C++ code block is executed
with in a try/catch
block that handles exceptions much like Python
does. This removes the need for most error checking code.
It is worth note that CXX lists do have indexing operators that result
in code that looks much like Python. However, the overhead in using them
appears to be relatively high, so the standard Python API was used on the
seq.ptr()
which is the underlying PyObject*
of the
List object.
The #line
directive that is the first line of the C code
block isn't necessary, but it's nice for debugging. If the compilation fails
because of the syntax error in the code, the error will be reported as an error
in the Python file "binary_search.py" with an offset from the given line number
(29 here).
So what was all our effort worth in terms of efficiency? Well not a lot in
this case. The examples/binary_search.py file runs both Python and C versions
of the functions As well as using the standard bisect
module. If
we run it on a 1 million element list and run the search 3000 times (for 0-
2999), here are the results we get:
C:\home\ej\wrk\scipy\weave\examples> python binary_search.py Binary search for 3000 items in 1000000 length list of integers: speed in python: 0.159999966621 speed of bisect: 0.121000051498 speed up: 1.32 speed in c: 0.110000014305 speed up: 1.45 speed in c(no asserts): 0.0900000333786 speed up: 1.78
So, we get roughly a 50-75% improvement depending on whether we use the Python asserts in our C version. If we move down to searching a 10000 element list, the advantage evaporates. Even smaller lists might result in the Python version being faster. I'd like to say that moving to Numeric lists (and getting rid of the GetItem() call) offers a substantial speed up, but my preliminary efforts didn't produce one. I think the log(N) algorithm is to blame. Because the algorithm is nice, there just isn't much time spent computing things, so moving to C isn't that big of a win. If there are ways to reduce conversion overhead of values, this may improve the C/Python speed up. Anyone have other explanations or faster code, please let me know.
The demo in examples/dict_sort.py is another example from the Python CookBook. This submission, by Alex Martelli, demonstrates how to return the values from a dictionary sorted by their keys:
def sortedDictValues3(adict): keys = adict.keys() keys.sort() return map(adict.get, keys)
Alex provides 3 algorithms and this is the 3rd and fastest of the set. The C version of this same algorithm follows:
def c_sort(adict): assert(type(adict) == type({})) code = """ #line 21 "dict_sort.py" Py::List keys = adict.keys(); Py::List items(keys.length()); keys.sort(); PyObject* item = NULL; for(int i = 0; i < keys.length();i++) { item = PyList_GET_ITEM(keys.ptr(),i); item = PyDict_GetItem(adict.ptr(),item); Py_XINCREF(item); PyList_SetItem(items.ptr(),i,item); } return_val = Py::new_reference_to(items); """ return inline_tools.inline(code,['adict'],verbose=1)
Like the original Python function, the C++ version can handle any Python dictionary regardless of the key/value pair types. It uses CXX objects for the most part to declare python types in C++, but uses Python API calls to manipulate their contents. Again, this choice is made for speed. The C++ version, while more complicated, is about a factor of 2 faster than Python.
C:\home\ej\wrk\scipy\weave\examples> python dict_sort.py Dict sort of 1000 items for 300 iterations: speed in python: 0.319999933243 [0, 1, 2, 3, 4] speed in c: 0.151000022888 speed up: 2.12 [0, 1, 2, 3, 4]
And the following is a inline C version of the same function:def _castCopyAndTranspose(type, array): if a.typecode() == type: cast_array = copy.copy(Numeric.transpose(a)) else: cast_array = copy.copy(Numeric.transpose(a).astype(type)) return cast_array
This example uses blitz++ arrays instead of the standard representation of Numeric arrays so that indexing is simplier to write. This is accomplished by passing in the blitz++ "type factories" to override the standard Python to C++ type conversions. Blitz++ arrays allow you to write clean, fast code, but they also are sloooow to compile (20 seconds or more for this snippet). This is why they aren't the default type used for Numeric arrays (and also because most compilers can't compile blitz arrays...).from weave.blitz_tools import blitz_type_factories from weave import scalar_spec from weave import inline def _cast_copy_transpose(type,a_2d): assert(len(shape(a_2d)) == 2) new_array = zeros(shape(a_2d),type) numeric_type = scalar_spec.numeric_to_blitz_type_mapping[type] code = \ """ for(int i = 0;i < _Na_2d[0]; i++) for(int j = 0; j < _Na_2d[1]; j++) new_array(i,j) = (%s) a_2d(j,i); """ % numeric_type inline(code,['new_array','a_2d'], type_factories = blitz_type_factories,compiler='gcc') return new_array
inline()
is also forced
to use 'gcc' as the compiler because the default compiler on Windows (MSVC)
will not compile blitz code. 'gcc' I think will use the standard compiler
on Unix machine instead of explicitly forcing gcc (check this)
Comparisons of the Python vs inline C++ code show a factor of 3 speed up. Also
shown are the results of an "inplace" transpose routine that can be used if the
output of the linear algebra routine can overwrite the original matrix (this is
often appropriate). This provides another factor of 2 improvement.
#C:\home\ej\wrk\scipy\weave\examples> python cast_copy_transpose.py # Cast/Copy/Transposing (150,150)array 1 times # speed in python: 0.870999932289 # speed in c: 0.25 # speed up: 3.48 # inplace transpose c: 0.129999995232 # speed up: 6.70
inline
knows how to handle wxPython objects. Thats nice in and of
itself, but it also demonstrates that the type conversion mechanism is reasonably
flexible. Chances are, it won't take a ton of effort to support special types
you might have. The examples/wx_example.py borrows the scrolled window
example from the wxPython demo, accept that it mixes inline C code in the middle
of the drawing function.
Here, some of the Python calls to wx objects were just converted to C++ calls. There isn't any benefit, it just demonstrates the capabilities. You might want to use this if you have a computationally intensive loop in your drawing code that you want to speed up. On windows, you'll have to use the MSVC compiler if you use the standard wxPython DLLs distributed by Robin Dunn. Thats because MSVC and gcc, while binary compatible in C, are not binary compatible for C++. In fact, its probably best, no matter what platform you're on, to specify thatdef DoDrawing(self, dc): red = wxNamedColour("RED"); blue = wxNamedColour("BLUE"); grey_brush = wxLIGHT_GREY_BRUSH; code = \ """ #line 108 "wx_example.py" dc->BeginDrawing(); dc->SetPen(wxPen(*red,4,wxSOLID)); dc->DrawRectangle(5,5,50,50); dc->SetBrush(*grey_brush); dc->SetPen(wxPen(*blue,4,wxSOLID)); dc->DrawRectangle(15, 15, 50, 50); """ inline(code,['dc','red','blue','grey_brush']) dc.SetFont(wxFont(14, wxSWISS, wxNORMAL, wxNORMAL)) dc.SetTextForeground(wxColour(0xFF, 0x20, 0xFF)) te = dc.GetTextExtent("Hello World") dc.DrawText("Hello World", 60, 65) dc.SetPen(wxPen(wxNamedColour('VIOLET'), 4)) dc.DrawLine(5, 65+te[1], 60+te[0], 65+te[1]) ...
inline
use the same
compiler that was used to build wxPython to be on the safe side. There isn't currently
a way to learn this info from the library -- you just have to know. Also, at least
on the windows platform, you'll need to install the wxWindows libraries and link to
them. I think there is a way around this, but I haven't found it yet -- I get some
linking errors dealing with wxString. One final note. You'll probably have to
tweak weave/wx_spec.py or weave/wx_info.py for your machine's configuration to
point at the correct directories etc. There. That should sufficiently scare people
into not even looking at this... :)
The basic definition of the inline()
function has a slew of
optional variables. It also takes keyword arguments that are passed to
distutils
as compiler options. The following is a formatted
cut/paste of the argument section of inline's
doc-string. It
explains all of the variables. Some examples using various options will
follow.
def inline(code,arg_names,local_dict = None, global_dict = None, force = 0, compiler='', verbose = 0, support_code = None, customize=None, type_factories = None, auto_downcast=1, **kw):
inline
has quite
a few options as listed below. Also, the keyword arguments for distutils
extension modules are accepted to specify extra information needed for
compiling.
- code
- string. A string of valid C++ code. It should not specify a return statement. Instead it should assign results that need to be returned to Python in the return_val.
- arg_names
- list of strings. A list of Python variable names that should be transferred from Python into the C/C++ code.
- local_dict
- optional. dictionary. If specified, it is a dictionary of values that should be used as the local scope for the C/C++ code. If local_dict is not specified the local dictionary of the calling function is used.
- global_dict
- optional. dictionary. If specified, it is a dictionary of values that should be used as the global scope for the C/C++ code. If global_dict is not specified the global dictionary of the calling function is used.
- force
- optional. 0 or 1. default 0. If 1, the C++ code is compiled every time inline is called. This is really only useful for debugging, and probably only useful if you're editing support_code a lot.
- compiler
- optional. string. The name of compiler to use when compiling. On windows, it understands 'msvc' and 'gcc' as well as all the compiler names understood by distutils. On Unix, it'll only understand the values understoof by distutils. (I should add 'gcc' though to this).
On windows, the compiler defaults to the Microsoft C++ compiler. If this isn't available, it looks for mingw32 (the gcc compiler).
On Unix, it'll probably use the same compiler that was used when compiling Python. Cygwin's behavior should be similar.
- verbose
- optional. 0,1, or 2. defualt 0. Speficies how much much information is printed during the compile phase of inlining code. 0 is silent (except on windows with msvc where it still prints some garbage). 1 informs you when compiling starts, finishes, and how long it took. 2 prints out the command lines for the compilation process and can be useful if you're having problems getting code to work. Its handy for finding the name of the .cpp file if you need to examine it. verbose has no affect if the compilation isn't necessary.
- support_code
- optional. string. A string of valid C++ code declaring extra code that might be needed by your compiled function. This could be declarations of functions, classes, or structures.
- customize
- optional. base_info.custom_info object. An alternative way to specifiy support_code, headers, etc. needed by the function see the weave.base_info module for more details. (not sure this'll be used much).
- type_factories
- optional. list of type specification factories. These guys are what convert Python data types to C/C++ data types. If you'd like to use a different set of type conversions than the default, specify them here. Look in the type conversions section of the main documentation for examples.
- auto_downcast
- optional. 0 or 1. default 1. This only affects functions that have Numeric arrays as input variables. Setting this to 1 will cause all floating point values to be cast as float instead of double if all the Numeric arrays are of type float. If even one of the arrays has type double or double complex, all variables maintain there standard types.
inline()
also accepts a number ofdistutils
keywords for controlling how the code is compiled. The following descriptions have been copied from Greg Ward'sdistutils.extension.Extension
class doc- strings for convenience:
- sources
- [string] list of source filenames, relative to the distribution root (where the setup script lives), in Unix form (slash-separated) for portability. Source files may be C, C++, SWIG (.i), platform-specific resource files, or whatever else is recognized by the "build_ext" command as source for a Python extension. Note: The module_path file is always appended to the front of this list
- include_dirs
- [string] list of directories to search for C/C++ header files (in Unix form for portability)
- define_macros
- [(name : string, value : string|None)] list of macros to define; each macro is defined using a 2-tuple, where 'value' is either the string to define it to or None to define it without a particular value (equivalent of "#define FOO" in source or -DFOO on Unix C compiler command line)
- undef_macros
- [string] list of macros to undefine explicitly
- library_dirs
- [string] list of directories to search for C/C++ libraries at link time
- libraries
- [string] list of library names (not filenames or paths) to link against
- runtime_library_dirs
- [string] list of directories to search for C/C++ libraries at run time (for shared extensions, this is when the extension is loaded)
- extra_objects
- [string] list of extra files to link with (eg. object files not implied by 'sources', static library that must be explicitly specified, binary resource files, etc.)
- extra_compile_args
- [string] any extra platform- and compiler-specific information to use when compiling the source files in 'sources'. For platforms and compilers where "command line" makes sense, this is typically a list of command-line arguments, but for other platforms it could be anything.
- extra_link_args
- [string] any extra platform- and compiler-specific information to use when linking object files together to create the extension (or to create a new static Python interpreter). Similar interpretation as for 'extra_compile_args'.
- export_symbols
- [string] list of symbols to be exported from a shared extension. Not used on all platforms, and not generally necessary for Python extensions, which typically export exactly one symbol: "init" + extension_name.
inline
and also how the various arguments are used.
In the simplest (most) cases, code
and arg_names
are the only arguments that need to be specified. Here's a simple example
run on Windows machine that has Microsoft VC++ installed.
When>>> from weave import inline >>> a = 'string' >>> code = """ ... int l = a.length(); ... return_val = Py::new_reference_to(Py::Int(l)); ... """ >>> inline(code,['a']) sc_86e98826b65b047ffd2cd5f479c627f12.cpp Creating library C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\sc_86e98826b65b047ffd2cd5f479c627f12.lib and object C:\DOCUME~ 1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\sc_86e98826b65b047ff d2cd5f479c627f12.exp 6 >>> inline(code,['a']) 6
inline
is first run, you'll notice that pause and some
trash printed to the screen. The "trash" is acutually part of the compilers
output that distutils does not supress. The name of the extension file,
sc_bighonkingnumber.cpp
, is generated from the md5 check sum
of the C/C++ code fragment. On Unix or windows machines with only
gcc installed, the trash will not appear. On the second call, the code
fragment is not compiled since it already exists, and only the answer is
returned. Now kill the interpreter and restart, and run the same code with
a different string.
>>> from weave import inline >>> a = 'a longer string' >>> code = """ ... int l = a.length(); ... return_val = Py::new_reference_to(Py::Int(l)); ... """ >>> inline(code,['a']) 15
Notice this time, inline()
did not recompile the code because it
found the compiled function in the persistent catalog of functions. There is
a short pause as it looks up and loads the function, but it is much shorter
than compiling would require.
You can specify the local and global dictionaries if you'd like (much like
exec
or eval()
in Python), but if they aren't
specified, the "expected" ones are used -- i.e. the ones from the function that
called inline()
. This is accomplished through a little call
frame trickery. Here is an example where the local_dict is specified using
the same code example from above:
>>> a = 'a longer string' >>> b = 'an even longer string' >>> my_dict = {'a':b} >>> inline(code,['a']) 15 >>> inline(code,['a'],my_dict) 21
Everytime, the code
is changed, inline
does a
recompile. However, changing any of the other options in inline does not
force a recompile. The force
option was added so that one
could force a recompile when tinkering with other variables. In practice,
it is just as easy to change the code
by a single character
(like adding a space some place) to force the recompile. Note: It also
might be nice to add some methods for purging the cache and on disk
catalogs.
I use verbose
sometimes for debugging. When set to 2, it'll
output all the information (including the name of the .cpp file) that you'd
expect from running a make file. This is nice if you need to examine the
generated code to see where things are going haywire. Note that error
messages from failed compiles are printed to the screen even if verbose
is set to 0.
The following example demonstrates using gcc instead of the standard msvc
compiler on windows using same code fragment as above. Because the example has
already been compiled, the force=1
flag is needed to make
inline()
ignore the previously compiled version and recompile
using gcc. The verbose flag is added to show what is printed out:
That's quite a bit of output.>>>inline(code,['a'],compiler='gcc',verbose=2,force=1) running build_ext building 'sc_86e98826b65b047ffd2cd5f479c627f13' extension c:\gcc-2.95.2\bin\g++.exe -mno-cygwin -mdll -O2 -w -Wstrict-prototypes -IC: \home\ej\wrk\scipy\weave -IC:\Python21\Include -c C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCAL S~1\Temp\python21_compiled\sc_86e98826b65b047ffd2cd5f479c627f13.cpp -o C:\D OCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\sc_86e98826b65b04 7ffd2cd5f479c627f13.o skipping C:\home\ej\wrk\scipy\weave\CXX\cxxextensions.c (C:\DOCUME~1\eri c\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\cxxextensions.o up-to-date) skipping C:\home\ej\wrk\scipy\weave\CXX\cxxsupport.cxx (C:\DOCUME~1\eric \LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\cxxsupport.o up-to-date) skipping C:\home\ej\wrk\scipy\weave\CXX\IndirectPythonInterface.cxx (C:\ DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\indirectpythonin terface.o up-to-date) skipping C:\home\ej\wrk\scipy\weave\CXX\cxx_extensions.cxx (C:\DOCUME~1\ eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\cxx_extensions.o up-to-da te) writing C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\sc_86 e98826b65b047ffd2cd5f479c627f13.def c:\gcc-2.95.2\bin\dllwrap.exe --driver-name g++ -mno-cygwin -mdll -static - -output-lib C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\l ibsc_86e98826b65b047ffd2cd5f479c627f13.a --def C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Te mp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\sc_86e98826b65b047ffd2cd5f479c627f13.def -s C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\temp\Release\sc_86e9882 6b65b047ffd2cd5f479c627f13.o C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compil ed\temp\Release\cxxextensions.o C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_com piled\temp\Release\cxxsupport.o C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_com piled\temp\Release\indirectpythoninterface.o C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp \python21_compiled\temp\Release\cxx_extensions.o -LC:\Python21\libs -lpytho n21 -o C:\DOCUME~1\eric\LOCALS~1\Temp\python21_compiled\sc_86e98826b65b047f fd2cd5f479c627f13.pyd 15
verbose=1
just prints the compile
time.
>>>inline(code,['a'],compiler='gcc',verbose=1,force=1) Compiling code... finished compiling (sec): 6.00800001621 15
Note: I've only used the compiler
option for switching between 'msvc'
and 'gcc' on windows. It may have use on Unix also, but I don't know yet.
The support_code
argument is likely to be used a lot. It allows
you to specify extra code fragments such as function, structure or class
definitions that you want to use in the code
string. Note that
changes to support_code
do not force a recompile. The
catalog only relies on code
(for performance reasons) to determine
whether recompiling is necessary. So, if you make a change to support_code,
you'll need to alter code
in some way or use the
force
argument to get the code to recompile. I usually just add
some inocuous whitespace to the end of one of the lines in code
somewhere. Here's an example of defining a separate method for calculating
the string length:
>>> from weave import inline >>> a = 'a longer string' >>> support_code = """ ... PyObject* length(Py::String a) ... { ... int l = a.length(); ... return Py::new_reference_to(Py::Int(l)); ... } ... """ >>> inline("return_val = length(a);",['a'], ... support_code = support_code) 15
customize
is a left over from a previous way of specifying
compiler options. It is a custom_info
object that can specify
quite a bit of information about how a file is compiled. These
info
objects are the standard way of defining compile information
for type conversion classes. However, I don't think they are as handy here,
especially since we've exposed all the keyword arguments that distutils can
handle. Between these keywords, and the support_code
option, I
think customize
may be obsolete. We'll see if anyone cares to use
it. If not, it'll get axed in the next version.
The type_factories
variable is important to people who want to
customize the way arguments are converted from Python to C. We'll talk about
this in the next chapter **xx** of this document when we discuss type
conversions.
auto_downcast
handles one of the big type conversion issues that
is common when using Numeric arrays in conjunction with Python scalar values.
If you have an array of single precision values and multiply that array by a
Python scalar, the result is upcast to a double precision array because the
scalar value is double precision. This is not usually the desired behavior
because it can double your memory usage. auto_downcast
goes
some distance towards changing the casting precedence of arrays and scalars.
If your only using single precision arrays, it will automatically downcast all
scalar values from double to single precision when they are passed into the
C++ code. This is the default behavior. If you want all values to keep there
default type, set auto_downcast
to 0.
inline
were to completely live up
to its name, any modifications to variables in the C++ code would be reflected
in the Python variables when control was passed back to Python. For example,
the desired behavior would be something like:
Instead you get:# THIS DOES NOT WORK >>> a = 1 >>> weave.inline("a++;",['a']) >>> a 2
Variables are passed into C++ as if you are calling a Python function. Python's calling convention is sometimes called "pass by assignment". This means its as if a>>> a = 1 >>> weave.inline("a++;",['a']) >>> a 1
c_a = a
assignment is made right before inline
call is made and the c_a
variable is used within the C++ code.
Thus, any changes made to c_a
are not reflected in Python's
a
variable. Things do get a little more confusing, however, when
looking at variables with mutable types. Changes made in C++ to the contents
of mutable types are reflected in the Python variables.
So modifications to the contents of mutable types in C++ are seen when control is returned to Python. Modifications to immutable types such as tuples, strings, and numbers do not alter the Python variables. If you need to make changes to an immutable variable, you'll need to assign the new value to the "magic" variable>>> a= [1,2] >>> weave.inline("PyList_SetItem(a.ptr(),0,PyInt_FromLong(3));",['a']) >>> print a [3, 2]
return_val
in C++. This
value is returned by the inline()
function:
The>>> a = 1 >>> a = weave.inline("return_val = Py::new_reference_to(Py::Int(a+1));",['a']) >>> a 2
return_val
variable can also be used to return newly created
values. This is possible by returning a tuple. The following trivial example
illustrates how this can be done:
# python version def multi_return(): return 1, '2nd' # C version. def c_multi_return(): code = """ Py::Tuple results(2); results[0] = Py::Int(1); results[1] = Py::String("2nd"); return_val = Py::new_reference_to(results); """ return inline_tools.inline(code)
The example is available in examples/tuple_return.py
. It also
has the dubious honor of demonstrating how much inline()
can
slow things down. The C version here is about 10 times slower than the Python
version. Of course, something so trivial has no reason to be written in
C anyway.
locals()
inline
passes the locals()
and globals()
dictionaries from Python into the C++ function from the calling function. It
extracts the variables that are used in the C++ code from these dictionaries,
converts then to C++ variables, and then calculates using them. It seems like
it would be trivial, then, after the calculations were finished to then insert
the new values back into the locals()
and globals()
dictionaries so that the modified values were reflected in Python.
Unfortunately, as pointed out by the Python manual, the locals() dictionary is
not writable.
I suspect locals()
is not writable because there are some
optimizations done to speed lookups of the local namespace. I'm guessing local
lookups don't always look at a dictionary to find values. Can someone "in the
know" confirm or correct this? Another thing I'd like to know is whether there
is a way to write to the local namespace of another stack frame from C/C++. If
so, it would be possible to have some clean up code in compiled functions that
wrote final values of variables in C++ back to the correct Python stack frame.
I think this goes a long way toward making inline
truely live up
to its name. I don't think we'll get to the point of creating variables in
Python for variables created in C -- although I suppose with a C/C++ parser you
could do that also.
weave
generates a C++ file holding an extension function for
each inline
code snippet. These file names are generated using
from the md5 signature of the code snippet and saved to a location specified by
the PYTHONCOMPILED environment variable (discussed later). The cpp files are
generally about 200-400 lines long and include quite a few functions to support
type conversions, etc. However, the actual compiled function is pretty simple.
Below is the familiar printf
example:
And here is the extension function generated by>>> import weave >>> a = 1 >>> weave.inline('printf("%d\\n",a);',['a']) 1
inline
:
Every inline function takes exactly two arguments -- the local and global dictionaries for the current scope. All variable values are looked up out of these dictionaries. The lookups, along with allstatic PyObject* compiled_func(PyObject*self, PyObject* args) { // The Py_None needs an incref before returning PyObject *return_val = NULL; int exception_occured = 0; PyObject *py__locals = NULL; PyObject *py__globals = NULL; PyObject *py_a; py_a = NULL; if(!PyArg_ParseTuple(args,"OO:compiled_func",&py__locals,&py__globals)) return NULL; try { PyObject* raw_locals = py_to_raw_dict(py__locals,"_locals"); PyObject* raw_globals = py_to_raw_dict(py__globals,"_globals"); int a = py_to_int (get_variable("a",raw_locals,raw_globals),"a"); /* Here is the inline code */ printf("%d\n",a); /* I would like to fill in changed locals and globals here... */ } catch( Py::Exception& e) { return_val = Py::Null(); exception_occured = 1; } if(!return_val && !exception_occured) { Py_INCREF(Py_None); return_val = Py_None; } /* clean up code */ /* return */ return return_val; }
inline
code
execution, are done within a C++ try
block. If the variables
aren't found, or there is an error converting a Python variable to the
appropriate type in C++, an exception is raised. The C++ exception
is automatically converted to a Python exception by CXX and returned to Python.
The py_to_int()
function illustrates how the conversions and
exception handling works. py_to_int first checks that the given PyObject*
pointer is not NULL and is a Python integer. If all is well, it calls the
Python API to convert the value to an int
. Otherwise, it calls
handle_bad_type()
which gathers information about what went wrong
and then raises a CXX TypeError which returns to Python as a TypeError.
int py_to_int(PyObject* py_obj,char* name) { if (!py_obj || !PyInt_Check(py_obj)) handle_bad_type(py_obj,"int", name); return (int) PyInt_AsLong(py_obj); }
Since thevoid handle_bad_type(PyObject* py_obj, char* good_type, char* var_name) { char msg[500]; sprintf(msg,"received '%s' type instead of '%s' for variable '%s'", find_type(py_obj),good_type,var_name); throw Py::TypeError(msg); } char* find_type(PyObject* py_obj) { if(py_obj == NULL) return "C NULL value"; if(PyCallable_Check(py_obj)) return "callable"; if(PyString_Check(py_obj)) return "string"; if(PyInt_Check(py_obj)) return "int"; if(PyFloat_Check(py_obj)) return "float"; if(PyDict_Check(py_obj)) return "dict"; if(PyList_Check(py_obj)) return "list"; if(PyTuple_Check(py_obj)) return "tuple"; if(PyFile_Check(py_obj)) return "file"; if(PyModule_Check(py_obj)) return "module"; //should probably do more interagation (and thinking) on these. if(PyCallable_Check(py_obj) && PyInstance_Check(py_obj)) return "callable"; if(PyInstance_Check(py_obj)) return "instance"; if(PyCallable_Check(py_obj)) return "callable"; return "unkown type"; }
inline
is also executed within the try/catch
block, you can use CXX exceptions within your code. It is usually a bad idea
to directly return
from your code, even if an error occurs. This
skips the clean up section of the extension function. In this simple example,
there isn't any clean up code, but in more complicated examples, there may
be some reference counting that needs to be taken care of here on converted
variables. To avoid this, either uses exceptions or set
return_val
to NULL and use if/then's
to skip code
after errors.
There are several main steps to using C/C++ code withing Python:
Items 1 and 2 above are related, but most easily discussed separately. Type
conversions are customizable by the user if needed. Understanding them is
pretty important for anything beyond trivial uses of inline
.
Generating the C/C++ code is handled by ext_function
and
ext_module
classes and . For the most part, compiling the code is
handled by distutils. Some customizations were needed, but they were
relatively minor and do not require changes to distutils itself. Cataloging is
pretty simple in concept, but surprisingly required the most code to implement
(and still likely needs some work). So, this section covers items 1 and 4 from
the list. Item 2 is covered later in the chapter covering the
ext_tools
module, and distutils is covered by a completely
separate document xxx.
xxx_converter
instead of
xxx_specification
is a more descriptive name. Might change in
future version?
By default, inline()
makes the following type conversions between
Python and C++ types.
Default Data Type Conversions | |
Python |
C++ |
int | int |
float | double |
complex | std::complex |
string | Py::String |
list | Py::List |
dict | Py::Dict |
tuple | Py::Tuple |
file | FILE* |
callable | PyObject* |
instance | PyObject* |
Numeric.array | PyArrayObject* |
wxXXX | wxXXX* |
The Py::
namespace is defined by the
CXX library which has C++ class
equivalents for many Python types. std::
is the namespace of the
standard library in C++.
Note:
long int
yet (I think they are currenlty converted
to int - - check this).
Python to C++ conversions fill in code in several locations in the generated
inline
extension function. Below is the basic template for the
function. This is actually the exact code that is generated by calling
weave.inline("")
.
Thestatic PyObject* compiled_func(PyObject*self, PyObject* args) { PyObject *return_val = NULL; int exception_occured = 0; PyObject *py__locals = NULL; PyObject *py__globals = NULL; PyObject *py_a; py_a = NULL; if(!PyArg_ParseTuple(args,"OO:compiled_func",&py__locals,&py__globals)) return NULL; try { PyObject* raw_locals = py_to_raw_dict(py__locals,"_locals"); PyObject* raw_globals = py_to_raw_dict(py__globals,"_globals"); /* argument conversion code */ /* inline code */ /*I would like to fill in changed locals and globals here...*/ } catch( Py::Exception& e) { return_val = Py::Null(); exception_occured = 1; } /* cleanup code */ if(!return_val && !exception_occured) { Py_INCREF(Py_None); return_val = Py_None; } return return_val; }
/* inline code */
section is filled with the code passed to
the inline()
function call. The
/*argument convserion code*/
and /* cleanup code */
sections are filled with code that handles conversion from Python to C++
types and code that deallocates memory or manipulates reference counts before
the function returns. The following sections demostrate how these two areas
are filled in by the default conversion methods.
Note: I'm not sure I have reference counting correct on a few of these. The
only thing I increase/decrease the ref count on is Numeric arrays. If you
see an issue, please let me know.
The argument conversion code inserted for>>> a = 1 >>> inline("",['a'])
a
is:
/* argument conversion code */ int a = py_to_int (get_variable("a",raw_locals,raw_globals),"a");
get_variable()
reads the variable a
from the local and global namespaces. py_to_int()
has the following
form:
Similarly, the float and complex conversion routines look like:static int py_to_int(PyObject* py_obj,char* name) { if (!py_obj || !PyInt_Check(py_obj)) handle_bad_type(py_obj,"int", name); return (int) PyInt_AsLong(py_obj); }
Numeric conversions do not require any clean up code.static double py_to_float(PyObject* py_obj,char* name) { if (!py_obj || !PyFloat_Check(py_obj)) handle_bad_type(py_obj,"float", name); return PyFloat_AsDouble(py_obj); } static std::complex
py_to_complex(PyObject* py_obj,char* name) { if (!py_obj || !PyComplex_Check(py_obj)) handle_bad_type(py_obj,"complex", name); return std::complex (PyComplex_RealAsDouble(py_obj), PyComplex_ImagAsDouble(py_obj)); }
The argument conversion code inserted for>>> a = [1] >>> inline("",['a'])
a
is:
/* argument conversion code */ Py::List a = py_to_list (get_variable("a",raw_locals,raw_globals),"a");
get_variable()
reads the variable a
from the local and global namespaces. py_to_list()
and its
friends has the following form:
CXX handles reference counts on for strings, lists, tuples, and dictionaries, so clean up code isn't necessary.static Py::List py_to_list(PyObject* py_obj,char* name) { if (!py_obj || !PyList_Check(py_obj)) handle_bad_type(py_obj,"list", name); return Py::List(py_obj); } static Py::String py_to_string(PyObject* py_obj,char* name) { if (!PyString_Check(py_obj)) handle_bad_type(py_obj,"string", name); return Py::String(py_obj); } static Py::Dict py_to_dict(PyObject* py_obj,char* name) { if (!py_obj || !PyDict_Check(py_obj)) handle_bad_type(py_obj,"dict", name); return Py::Dict(py_obj); } static Py::Tuple py_to_tuple(PyObject* py_obj,char* name) { if (!py_obj || !PyTuple_Check(py_obj)) handle_bad_type(py_obj,"tuple", name); return Py::Tuple(py_obj); }
The argument conversion code is:>>> a = open("bob",'w') >>> inline("",['a'])
/* argument conversion code */ PyObject* py_a = get_variable("a",raw_locals,raw_globals); FILE* a = py_to_file(py_a,"a");
get_variable()
reads the variable a
from the local and global namespaces. py_to_file()
converts
PyObject* to a FILE* and increments the reference count of the PyObject*:
Because the PyObject* was incremented, the clean up code needs to decrement the counterFILE* py_to_file(PyObject* py_obj, char* name) { if (!py_obj || !PyFile_Check(py_obj)) handle_bad_type(py_obj,"file", name); Py_INCREF(py_obj); return PyFile_AsFile(py_obj); }
Its important to understand that file conversion only works on actual files -- i.e. ones created using the/* cleanup code */ Py_XDECREF(py_a);
open()
command in Python. It does
not support converting arbitrary objects that support the file interface into
C FILE*
pointers. This can affect many things. For example, in
initial printf()
examples, one might be tempted to solve the
problem of C and Python IDE's (PythonWin, PyCrust, etc.) writing to different
stdout and stderr by using fprintf()
and passing in
sys.stdout
and sys.stderr
. For example, instead of
You might try:>>> weave.inline('printf("hello\\n");')
This will work as expected from a standard python interpreter, but in PythonWin, the following occurs:>>> buf = sys.stdout >>> weave.inline('fprintf(buf,"hello\\n");',['buf'])
The traceback tells us that>>> buf = sys.stdout >>> weave.inline('fprintf(buf,"hello\\n");',['buf']) Traceback (most recent call last): File "
", line 1, in ? File "C:\Python21\weave\inline_tools.py", line 315, in inline auto_downcast = auto_downcast, File "C:\Python21\weave\inline_tools.py", line 386, in compile_function type_factories = type_factories) File "C:\Python21\weave\ext_tools.py", line 197, in __init__ auto_downcast, type_factories) File "C:\Python21\weave\ext_tools.py", line 390, in assign_variable_types raise TypeError, format_error_msg(errors) TypeError: {'buf': "Unable to convert variable 'buf' to a C++ type."}
inline()
was unable to convert 'buf' to a
C++ type (If instance conversion was implemented, the error would have occurred at
runtime instead). Why is this? Let's look at what the buf
object
really is:
PythonWin has reassigned>>> buf pywin.framework.interact.InteractiveView instance at 00EAD014
sys.stdout
to a special object that
implements the Python file interface. This works great in Python, but since
the special object doesn't have a FILE* pointer underlying it, fprintf doesn't
know what to do with it (well this will be the problem when instance conversion
is implemented...).
Callable and instance variables are converted to PyObject*. Nothing is done to there reference counts.>>> def a(): pass >>> inline("",['a'])
/* argument conversion code */ PyObject* a = py_to_callable(get_variable("a",raw_locals,raw_globals),"a");
get_variable()
reads the variable a
from the local and global namespaces. The py_to_callable()
and
py_to_instance()
don't currently increment the ref count.
There is no cleanup code for callables, modules, or instances.PyObject* py_to_callable(PyObject* py_obj, char* name) { if (!py_obj || !PyCallable_Check(py_obj)) handle_bad_type(py_obj,"callable", name); return py_obj; } PyObject* py_to_instance(PyObject* py_obj, char* name) { if (!py_obj || !PyFile_Check(py_obj)) handle_bad_type(py_obj,"instance", name); return py_obj; }
Converting from Python to C++ types is handled by xxx_specification classes. A type specification class actually serve in two related but different roles. The first is in determining whether a Python variable that needs to be converted should be represented by the given class. The second is as a code generator that generate C++ code needed to convert from Python to C++ types for a specific variable.
When
is called for the first time, the code snippet has to be compiled. In this process, the variable 'a' is tested against a list of type specifications (the default list is stored in weave/ext_tools.py). The first specification in the list is used to represent the variable.>>> a = 1 >>> weave.inline('printf("%d",a);',['a'])
Examples of xxx_specification
are scattered throughout numerous
"xxx_spec.py" files in the weave
package. Closely related to
the xxx_specification
classes are yyy_info
classes.
These classes contain compiler, header, and support code information necessary
for including a certain set of capabilities (such as blitz++ or CXX support)
in a compiled module. xxx_specification
classes have one or more
yyy_info
classes associated with them.
If you'd like to define your own set of type specifications, the current best route
is to examine some of the existing spec and info files. Maybe looking over
sequence_spec.py and cxx_info.py are a good place to start. After defining
specification classes, you'll need to pass them into inline
using the
type_factories
argument.
A lot of times you may just want to change how a specific variable type is
represented. Say you'd rather have Python strings converted to
std::string
or maybe char*
instead of using the CXX
string object, but would like all other type conversions to have default
behavior. This requires that a new specification class that handles strings
is written and then prepended to a list of the default type specifications. Since
it is closer to the front of the list, it effectively overrides the default
string specification.
The following code demonstrates how this is done:
...
catalog.py
has a class called catalog
that helps keep
track of previously compiled functions. This prevents inline()
and related functions from having to compile functions everytime they are
called. Instead, catalog will check an in memory cache to see if the function
has already been loaded into python. If it hasn't, then it starts searching
through persisent catalogs on disk to see if it finds an entry for the given
function. By saving information about compiled functions to disk, it isn't
necessary to re-compile functions everytime you stop and restart the interpreter.
Functions are compiled once and stored for future use.
When inline(cpp_code)
is called the following things happen:
cpp_code
. If an entry for cpp_code
doesn't exist in the
cache or the cached function call fails (perhaps because the function doesn't
have compatible types) then the next step is to check the catalog.
cpp_code
. If cpp_code
has
ever been called, then this cache will be present (loaded from disk). If
the cache isn't present, then it is loaded from disk.
If the cache is present, each function in the cache is called until one is found that was compiled for the correct argument types. If none of the functions work, a new function is compiled with the given argument types. This function is written to the on-disk catalog as well as into the in-memory cache.
cpp_code
fails, the catalog looks through
the on-disk function catalogs for the entries. The PYTHONCOMPILED variable
determines where to search for these catalogs and in what order. If
PYTHONCOMPILED is not present several platform dependent locations are
searched. All functions found for cpp_code
in the path are
loaded into the in-memory cache with functions found earlier in the search
path closer to the front of the call list.
If the function isn't found in the on-disk catalog, then the function is compiled, written to the first writable directory in the PYTHONCOMPILED path, and also loaded into the in-memory cache.
Function caches are stored as dictionaries where the key is the entire C++ code string and the value is either a single function (as in the "level 1" cache) or a list of functions (as in the main catalog cache). On disk catalogs are stored in the same manor using standard Python shelves.
Early on, there was a question as to whether md5 check sums of the C++ code strings should be used instead of the actual code strings. I think this is the route inline Perl took. Some (admittedly quick) tests of the md5 vs. the entire string showed that using the entire string was at least a factor of 3 or 4 faster for Python. I think this is because it is more time consuming to compute the md5 value than it is to do look-ups of long strings in the dictionary. Look at the examples/md5_speed.py file for the test run.
The default location for catalog files on Unix is is ~/.pythonXX_compiled where XX is version of Python being used. If this directory doesn't exist, it is created the first time a catalog is used. The directory must be writable. If, for any reason it isn't, then the catalog attempts to create a directory based on your user id in the /tmp directory. The directory permissions are set so that only you have access to the directory. If this fails, I think you're out of luck. I don't think either of these should ever fail though. On Windows, a directory called pythonXX_compiled is created in the user's temporary directory.
The actual catalog file that lives in this directory is a Python shelve with a platform specific name such as "nt21compiled_catalog" so that multiple OSes can share the same file systems without trampling on each other. Along with the catalog file, the .cpp and .so or .pyd files created by inline will live in this directory. The catalog file simply contains keys which are the C++ code strings with values that are lists of functions. The function lists point at functions within these compiled modules. Each function in the lists executes the same C++ code string, but compiled for different input variables.
You can use the PYTHONCOMPILED environment variable to specify alternative locations for compiled functions. On Unix this is a colon (':') separated list of directories. On windows, it is a (';') separated list of directories. These directories will be searched prior to the default directory for a compiled function catalog. Also, the first writable directory in the list is where all new compiled function catalogs, .cpp and .so or .pyd files are written. Relative directory paths ('.' and '..') should work fine in the PYTHONCOMPILED variable as should environement variables.
There is a "special" path variable called MODULE that can be placed in the PYTHONCOMPILED variable. It specifies that the compiled catalog should reside in the same directory as the module that called it. This is useful if an admin wants to build a lot of compiled functions during the build of a package and then install them in site-packages along with the package. User's who specify MODULE in their PYTHONCOMPILED variable will have access to these compiled functions. Note, however, that if they call the function with a set of argument types that it hasn't previously been built for, the new function will be stored in their default directory (or some other writable directory in the PYTHONCOMPILED path) because the user will not have write access to the site-packages directory.
An example of using the PYTHONCOMPILED path on bash follows:
If you are using python21 on linux, and the module bob.py in site-packages has a compiled function in it, then the catalog search order when calling that function for the first time in a python session would be:PYTHONCOMPILED=MODULE:/some/path;export PYTHONCOMPILED;
The default location is always included in the search path./usr/lib/python21/site-packages/linuxpython_compiled /some/path/linuxpython_compiled ~/.python21_compiled/linuxpython_compiled
Note: hmmm. see a possible problem here. I should probably make a sub- directory such as /usr/lib/python21/site- packages/python21_compiled/linuxpython_compiled so that library files compiled with python21 are tried to link with python22 files in some strange scenarios. Need to check this.
The in-module cache (in weave.inline_tools
reduces the overhead
of calling inline functions by about a factor of 2. It can be reduced a little
more for type loop calls where the same function is called over and over again
if the cache was a single value instead of a dictionary, but the benefit is
very small (less than 5%) and the utility is quite a bit less. So, we'll stick
with a dictionary as the cache.
weave.blitz()
compiles Numeric Python expressions for fast
execution. For most applications, compiled expressions should provide a
factor of 2-10 speed-up over Numeric arrays. Using compiled
expressions is meant to be as unobtrusive as possible and works much like
pythons exec statement. As an example, the following code fragment takes a 5
point average of the 512x512 2d image, b, and stores it in array, a:
To compile the expression, convert the expression to a string by putting quotes around it and then usefrom scipy import * # or from Numeric import * a = ones((512,512), Float64) b = ones((512,512), Float64) # ...do some stuff to fill in b... # now average a[1:-1,1:-1] = (b[1:-1,1:-1] + b[2:,1:-1] + b[:-2,1:-1] \ + b[1:-1,2:] + b[1:-1,:-2]) / 5.
weave.blitz
:
The first timeimport weave expr = "a[1:-1,1:-1] = (b[1:-1,1:-1] + b[2:,1:-1] + b[:-2,1:-1]" \ "+ b[1:-1,2:] + b[1:-1,:-2]) / 5." weave.blitz(expr)
weave.blitz
is run for a given expression and
set of arguements, C++ code that accomplishes the exact same task as the Python
expression is generated and compiled to an extension module. This can take up
to a couple of minutes depending on the complexity of the function. Subsequent
calls to the function are very fast. Futher, the generated module is saved
between program executions so that the compilation is only done once for a
given expression and associated set of array types. If the given expression
is executed with a new set of array types, the code most be compiled again. This
does not overwrite the previously compiled function -- both of them are saved and
available for exectution.
The following table compares the run times for standard Numeric code and compiled code for the 5 point averaging.
Method | Run Time (seconds) |
Standard Numeric | 0.46349 |
blitz (1st time compiling) | 78.95526 |
blitz (subsequent calls) | 0.05843 (factor of 8 speedup) |
These numbers are for a 512x512 double precision image run on a 400 MHz Celeron processor under RedHat Linux 6.2.
Because of the slow compile times, its probably most effective to develop
algorithms as you usually do using the capabilities of scipy or the Numeric
module. Once the algorithm is perfected, put quotes around it and execute it
using weave.blitz
. This provides the standard rapid
prototyping strengths of Python and results in algorithms that run close to
that of hand coded C or Fortran.
weave.blitz
has only been tested under Linux
with gcc-2.95-3 and on Windows with Mingw32 (2.95.2). Its compiler
requirements are pretty heavy duty (see the
blitz++ home page), so it won't
work with just any compiler. Particularly MSVC++ isn't up to snuff. A number
of other compilers such as KAI++ will also work, but my suspicions are that gcc
will get the most use.
weave.blitz
handles all standard mathematic
operators except for the ** power operator. The built-in trigonmetric, log,
floor/ceil, and fabs functions might work (but haven't been tested). It also
handles all types of array indexing supported by the Numeric module.
weave.blitz
does not currently support operations that use
array broadcasting, nor have any of the special purpose functions in Numeric
such as take, compress, etc. been implemented. Note that there are no obvious
reasons why most of this functionality cannot be added to scipy.weave, so it
will likely trickle into future versions. Using slice()
objects
directly instead of start:stop:step
is also not supported.
This means that the result array must exist before calling>>> result = b + c + d
weave.blitz
. Future versions will allow the following:
>>> result = weave.blitz_eval("b + c + d")
weave.blitz
works best when algorithms can be expressed in a
"vectorized" form. Algorithms that have a large number of if/thens and other
conditions are better hand written in C or Fortran. Further, the restrictions
imposed by requiring vectorized expressions sometimes preclude the use of more
efficient data structures or algorithms. For maximum speed in these cases,
hand-coded C or Fortran code is the only way to go.
weave.blitz
can produce different results than Numeric in certain
situations. It can happen when the array receiving the results of a
calculation is also used during the calculation. The Numeric behavior is to
carry out the entire calculation on the right hand side of an equation and
store it in a temporary array. This temprorary array is assigned to the array
on the left hand side of the equation. blitz, on the other hand, does a
"running" calculation of the array elements assigning values from the right hand
side to the elements on the left hand side immediately after they are calculated.
Here is an example, provided by Prabhu Ramachandran, where this happens:
You can prevent this behavior by using a temporary array.# 4 point average. >>> expr = "u[1:-1, 1:-1] = (u[0:-2, 1:-1] + u[2:, 1:-1] + "\ ... "u[1:-1,0:-2] + u[1:-1, 2:])*0.25" >>> u = zeros((5, 5), 'd'); u[0,:] = 100 >>> exec (expr) >>> u array([[ 100., 100., 100., 100., 100.], [ 0., 25., 25., 25., 0.], [ 0., 0., 0., 0., 0.], [ 0., 0., 0., 0., 0.], [ 0., 0., 0., 0., 0.]]) >>> u = zeros((5, 5), 'd'); u[0,:] = 100 >>> weave.blitz (expr) >>> u array([[ 100. , 100. , 100. , 100. , 100. ], [ 0. , 25. , 31.25 , 32.8125 , 0. ], [ 0. , 6.25 , 9.375 , 10.546875 , 0. ], [ 0. , 1.5625 , 2.734375 , 3.3203125, 0. ], [ 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. , 0. ]])
>>> u = zeros((5, 5), 'd'); u[0,:] = 100 >>> temp = zeros((4, 4), 'd'); >>> expr = "temp = (u[0:-2, 1:-1] + u[2:, 1:-1] + "\ ... "u[1:-1,0:-2] + u[1:-1, 2:])*0.25;"\ ... "u[1:-1,1:-1] = temp" >>> weave.blitz (expr) >>> u array([[ 100., 100., 100., 100., 100.], [ 0., 25., 25., 25., 0.], [ 0., 0., 0., 0., 0.], [ 0., 0., 0., 0., 0.], [ 0., 0., 0., 0., 0.]])
weave.blitz
is not a general purpose Python->C compiler. It
only works for expressions that contain Numeric arrays and/or
Python scalar values. This focused scope concentrates effort on the
compuationally intensive regions of the program and sidesteps the difficult
issues associated with a general purpose Python->C compiler.
When Numeric calculates the value for the 2d array,a = 1.2 * b + c * d
a
, it does
the following steps:
Two things to note. Sincetemp1 = 1.2 * b temp2 = c * d a = temp1 + temp2
c
is an (perhaps large) array, a large
temporary array must be created to store the results of 1.2 * b
.
The same is true for temp2
. Allocation is slow. The second thing
is that we have 3 loops executing, one to calculate temp1
, one for
temp2
and one for adding them up. A C loop for the same problem
might look like:
Here, the 3 loops have been fused into a single loop and there is no longer a need for a temporary array. This provides a significant speed improvement over the above example (write me and tell me what you get).for(int i = 0; i < M; i++) for(int j = 0; j < N; j++) a[i,j] = 1.2 * b[i,j] + c[i,j] * d[i,j]
So, converting Numeric expressions into C/C++ loops that fuse the loops and eliminate temporary arrays can provide big gains. The goal then,is to convert Numeric expression to C/C++ loops, compile them in an extension module, and then call the compiled extension function. The good news is that there is an obvious correspondence between the Numeric expression above and the C loop. The bad news is that Numeric is generally much more powerful than this simple example illustrates and handling all possible indexing possibilities results in loops that are less than straight forward to write. (take a peak in Numeric for confirmation). Luckily, there are several available tools that simplify the process.
weave.blitz
relies heavily on several remarkable tools. On the
Python side, the main facilitators are Jermey Hylton's parser module and Jim
Huginin's Numeric module. On the compiled language side, Todd Veldhuizen's
blitz++ array library, written in C++ (shhhh. don't tell David Beazley), does
the heavy lifting. Don't assume that, because it's C++, it's much slower than C
or Fortran. Blitz++ uses a jaw dropping array of template techniques
(metaprogramming, template expression, etc) to convert innocent looking and
readable C++ expressions into to code that usually executes within a few
percentage points of Fortran code for the same problem. This is good.
Unfortunately all the template raz-ma-taz is very expensive to compile, so the
200 line extension modules often take 2 or more minutes to compile. This isn't so
good. weave.blitz
works to minimize this issue by remembering
where compiled modules live and reusing them instead of re-compiling every time
a program is re-run.
parser
module.
The following fragment creates an Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) object for the
expression and then converts to a (rather unpleasant looking) deeply nested list
representation of the tree.
Despite its looks, with some tools developed by Jermey H., its possible to search these trees for specific patterns (sub-trees), extract the sub-tree, manipulate them converting python specific code fragments to blitz code fragments, and then re-insert it in the parse tree. The parser module documentation has some details on how to do this. Traversing the new blitzified tree, writing out the terminal symbols as you go, creates our new blitz++ expression string.>>> import parser >>> import scipy.weave.misc >>> ast = parser.suite("a = b * c + d") >>> ast_list = ast.tolist() >>> sym_list = scipy.weave.misc.translate_symbols(ast_list) >>> pprint.pprint(sym_list) ['file_input', ['stmt', ['simple_stmt', ['small_stmt', ['expr_stmt', ['testlist', ['test', ['and_test', ['not_test', ['comparison', ['expr', ['xor_expr', ['and_expr', ['shift_expr', ['arith_expr', ['term', ['factor', ['power', ['atom', ['NAME', 'a']]]]]]]]]]]]]]], ['EQUAL', '='], ['testlist', ['test', ['and_test', ['not_test', ['comparison', ['expr', ['xor_expr', ['and_expr', ['shift_expr', ['arith_expr', ['term', ['factor', ['power', ['atom', ['NAME', 'b']]]], ['STAR', '*'], ['factor', ['power', ['atom', ['NAME', 'c']]]]], ['PLUS', '+'], ['term', ['factor', ['power', ['atom', ['NAME', 'd']]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]], ['NEWLINE', '']]], ['ENDMARKER', '']]
In Blitz it is as follows:>>> a = b[0:4:2] + c >>> a [0,2,4]
Here the range object works exactly like Python slice objects with the exception that the top index (3) is inclusive where as Python's (4) is exclusive. Other differences include the type declaraions in C++ and parentheses instead of brackets for indexing arrays. Currently,Array<2,int> b(10); Array<2,int> c(3); // ... Array<2,int> a = b(Range(0,3,2)) + c;
weave.blitz
handles the
inclusive/exclusive issue by subtracting one from upper indices during the
translation. An alternative that is likely more robust/maintainable in the
long run, is to write a PyRange class that behaves like Python's range.
This is likely very easy.
The stock blitz also doesn't handle negative indices in ranges. The current
implementation of the blitz()
has a partial solution to this
problem. It calculates and index that starts with a '-' sign by subtracting it
from the maximum index in the array so that:
This approach fails, however, when the top index is calculated from other values. In the following scenario, ifupper index limit /-----\ b[:-1] -> b(Range(0,Nb[0]-1-1))
i+j
evaluates to a negative
value, the compiled code will produce incorrect results and could even core-
dump. Right now, all calculated indices are assumed to be positive.
A solution is to calculate all indices up front using if/then to handle the +/- cases. This is a little work and results in more code, so it hasn't been done. I'm holding out to see if blitz++ can be modified to handle negative indexing, but haven't looked into how much effort is involved yet. While it needs fixin', I don't think there is a ton of code where this is an issue.b[:i-j] -> b(Range(0,i+j))
The actual translation of the Python expressions to blitz expressions is currently a two part process. First, all x:y:z slicing expression are removed from the AST, converted to slice(x,y,z) and re-inserted into the tree. Any math needed on these expressions (subtracting from the maximum index, etc.) are also preformed here. _beg and _end are used as special variables that are defined as blitz::fromBegin and blitz::toEnd.
becomes a more verbose:a[i+j:i+j+1,:] = b[2:3,:]
The second part does a simple string search/replace to convert to a blitz expression with the following translations:a[slice(i+j,i+j+1),slice(_beg,_end)] = b[slice(2,3),slice(_beg,_end)]
slice(_beg,_end) -> _all # not strictly needed, but cuts down on code. slice -> blitz::Range [ -> ( ] -> ) _stp -> 1
_all
is defined in the compiled function as
blitz::Range.all()
. These translations could of course happen
directly in the syntax tree. But the string replacement is slightly easier.
Note that name spaces are maintained in the C++ code to lessen the likelyhood
of name clashes. Currently no effort is made to detect name clashes. A good
rule of thumb is don't use values that start with '_' or 'py_' in compiled
expressions and you'll be fine.
weave.blitz
handles this issue by examining the types of the
variables in the expression being executed, and compiling a function for those
explicit types. For example:
When compiling this expression to C++,a = ones((5,5),Float32) b = ones((5,5),Float32) weave.blitz("a = a + b")
weave.blitz
sees that the
values for a and b in the local scope have type Float32
, or 'float'
on a 32 bit architecture. As a result, it compiles the function using
the float type (no attempt has been made to deal with 64 bit issues).
It also goes one step further. If all arrays have the same type, a templated
version of the function is made and instantiated for float, double,
complexWhat happens if you call a compiled function with array types that are different than the ones for which it was originally compiled? No biggie, you'll just have to wait on it to compile a new version for your new types. This doesn't overwrite the old functions, as they are still accessible. See the catalog section in the inline() documentation to see how this is handled. Suffice to say, the mechanism is transparent to the user and behaves like dynamic typing with the occasional wait for compiling newly typed functions.
When working with combined scalar/array operations, the type of the array is always used. This is similar to the savespace flag that was recently added to Numeric. This prevents issues with the following expression perhaps unexpectedly being calculated at a higher (more expensive) precision that can occur in Python:
In this example,>>> a = array((1,2,3),typecode = Float32) >>> b = a * 2.1 # results in b being a Float64 array.
the>>> a = ones((5,5),Float32) >>> b = ones((5,5),Float32) >>> weave.blitz("b = a * 2.1")
2.1
is cast down to a float
before carrying out
the operation. If you really want to force the calculation to be a
double
, define a
and b
as
double
arrays.
One other point of note. Currently, you must include both the right hand side
and left hand side (assignment side) of your equation in the compiled
expression. Also, the array being assigned to must be created prior to calling
weave.blitz
. I'm pretty sure this is easily changed so that a
compiled_eval expression can be defined, but no effort has been made to
allocate new arrays (and decern their type) on the fly.
weave.inline()
documentation.
It only requires that arraysa = b + c
a
, b
, and c
have the same shape. However, expressions like:
are not so trivial. Since slicing is involved, the size of the slices, not the input arrays must be checked. Broadcasting complicates things further because arrays and slices with different dimensions and shapes may be compatible for math operations (broadcasting isn't yet supported bya[i+j:i+j+1,:] = b[2:3,:] + c
weave.blitz
). Reductions have a similar effect as their
results are different shapes than their input operand. The binary operators in
Numeric compare the shapes of their two operands just before they operate on
them. This is possible because Numeric treats each operation independently.
The intermediate (temporary) arrays created during sub-operations in an
expression are tested for the correct shape before they are combined by another
operation. Because weave.blitz
fuses all operations into a
single loop, this isn't possible. The shape comparisons must be done and
guaranteed compatible before evaluating the expression.
The solution chosen converts input arrays to "dummy arrays" that only represent the dimensions of the arrays, not the data. Binary operations on dummy arrays check that input array sizes are comptible and return a dummy array with the size correct size. Evaluating an expression of dummy arrays traces the changing array sizes through all operations and fails if incompatible array sizes are ever found.
The machinery for this is housed in weave.size_check
. It
basically involves writing a new class (dummy array) and overloading it math
operators to calculate the new sizes correctly. All the code is in Python and
there is a fair amount of logic (mainly to handle indexing and slicing) so the
operation does impose some overhead. For large arrays (ie. 50x50x50), the
overhead is negligible compared to evaluating the actual expression. For small
arrays (ie. 16x16), the overhead imposed for checking the shapes with this
method can cause the weave.blitz
to be slower than evaluating
the expression in Python.
What can be done to reduce the overhead? (1) The size checking code could be
moved into C. This would likely remove most of the overhead penalty compared
to Numeric (although there is also some calling overhead), but no effort has
been made to do this. (2) You can also call weave.blitz
with
check_size=0
and the size checking isn't done. However, if the
sizes aren't compatible, it can cause a core-dump. So, foregoing size_checking
isn't advisable until your code is well debugged.
weave.blitz
uses the same machinery as
weave.inline
to build the extension module. The only difference
is the code included in the function is automatically generated from the
Numeric array expression instead of supplied by the user.
weave.inline
and weave.blitz
are high level tools
that generate extension modules automatically. Under the covers, they use several
classes from weave.ext_tools
to help generate the extension module.
The main two classes are ext_module
and ext_function
(I'd
like to add ext_class
and ext_method
also). These classes
simplify the process of generating extension modules by handling most of the "boiler
plate" code automatically.
Note: inline
actually sub-classes weave.ext_tools.ext_function
to generate slightly different code than the standard ext_function
.
The main difference is that the standard class converts function arguments to
C types, while inline always has two arguments, the local and global dicts, and
the grabs the variables that need to be convereted to C from these.
The function# examples/increment_example.py from weave import ext_tools def build_increment_ext(): """ Build a simple extension with functions that increment numbers. The extension will be built in the local directory. """ mod = ext_tools.ext_module('increment_ext') a = 1 # effectively a type declaration for 'a' in the # following functions. ext_code = "return_val = Py::new_reference_to(Py::Int(a+1));" func = ext_tools.ext_function('increment',ext_code,['a']) mod.add_function(func) ext_code = "return_val = Py::new_reference_to(Py::Int(a+2));" func = ext_tools.ext_function('increment_by_2',ext_code,['a']) mod.add_function(func) mod.compile()
build_increment_ext()
creates an extension module
named increment_ext
and compiles it to a shared library (.so or
.pyd) that can be loaded into Python.. increment_ext
contains two
functions, increment
and increment_by_2
.
The first line of build_increment_ext()
,
creates anmod = ext_tools.ext_module('increment_ext')
ext_module
instance that is ready to have
ext_function
instances added to it. ext_function
instances are created much with a calling convention similar to
weave.inline()
. The most common call includes a C/C++ code
snippet and a list of the arguments for the function. The following
creates a C/C++ extension function that is equivalent to the following Python function:ext_code = "return_val = Py::new_reference_to(Py::Int(a+1));" func = ext_tools.ext_function('increment',ext_code,['a'])
A second method is also added to the module and then,def increment(a): return a + 1
is called to build the extension module. By default, the module is created in the current working directory. This example is available in themod.compile()
examples/increment_example.py
file
found in the weave
directory. At the bottom of the file in the
module's "main" program, an attempt to import increment_ext
without
building it is made. If this fails (the module doesn't exist in the PYTHONPATH),
the module is built by calling build_increment_ext()
. This approach
only takes the time consuming ( a few seconds for this example) process of building
the module if it hasn't been built before.
Note: If we were willing to always pay the penalty of building the C++ code for a module, we could store the md5 checksum of the C++ code along with some information about the compiler, platform, etc. Then,if __name__ == "__main__": try: import increment_ext except ImportError: build_increment_ext() import increment_ext a = 1 print 'a, a+1:', a, increment_ext.increment(a) print 'a, a+2:', a, increment_ext.increment_by_2(a)
ext_module.compile()
could try importing the module before it actually
compiles it, check the md5 checksum and other meta-data in the imported module
with the meta-data of the code it just produced and only compile the code if
the module didn't exist or the meta-data didn't match. This would reduce the
above code to:
Note: There would always be the overhead of building the C++ code, but it would only actually compile the code once. You pay a little in overhead and get cleaner "import" code. Needs some thought.if __name__ == "__main__": build_increment_ext() a = 1 print 'a, a+1:', a, increment_ext.increment(a) print 'a, a+2:', a, increment_ext.increment_by_2(a)
If you run increment_example.py
from the command line, you get
the following:
If the module didn't exist before it was run, the module is created. If it did exist, it is just imported and used.[eric@n0]$ python increment_example.py a, a+1: 1 2 a, a+2: 1 3
examples/fibonacci.py
provides a little more complex example of
how to use ext_tools
. Fibonacci numbers are a series of numbers
where each number in the series is the sum of the previous two: 1, 1, 2, 3, 5,
8, etc. Here, the first two numbers in the series are taken to be 1. One
approach to calculating Fibonacci numbers uses recursive function calls. In
Python, it might be written as:
In C, the same function would look something like this:def fib(a): if a <= 2: return 1 else: return fib(a-2) + fib(a-1)
Recursion is much faster in C than in Python, so it would be beneficial to use the C version for fibonacci number calculations instead of the Python version. We need an extension function that calls this C function to do this. This is possible by including the above code snippet as "support code" and then calling it from the extension function. Support code snippets (usually structure definitions, helper functions and the like) are inserted into the extension module C/C++ file before the extension function code. Here is how to build the C version of the fibonacci number generator:int fib(int a) { if(a <= 2) return 1; else return fib(a-2) + fib(a-1); }
XXX More about custom_info, and what xxx_info instances are good for.def build_fibonacci(): """ Builds an extension module with fibonacci calculators. """ mod = ext_tools.ext_module('fibonacci_ext') a = 1 # this is effectively a type declaration # recursive fibonacci in C fib_code = """ int fib1(int a) { if(a <= 2) return 1; else return fib1(a-2) + fib1(a-1); } """ ext_code = """ int val = fib1(a); return_val = Py::new_reference_to(Py::Int(val)); """ fib = ext_tools.ext_function('fib',ext_code,['a']) fib.customize.add_support_code(fib_code) mod.add_function(fib) mod.compile()
Note: recursion is not the fastest way to calculate fibonacci numbers, but this approach serves nicely for this example.
weave
didstdio.h
) For instance, if you
try to pass in a variable named stdout
, you'll get a cryptic error report
due to the fact that stdio.h
also defines the name. weave
should probably try and handle this in some way.
Other things...