Greetings, I've been working with QuantLib-Python, and I've noted some issues related to that. 1] QL-Python doesn't work with SWIG 1.3.22; I initally downloaded that (being the latest version) and compilation failed. I didn't go too much into the causes, but when I switched to 1.3.21 (the one which was used to generate the released version) everything worked smoothly. I tried this on a Win2K system, with the prebuilt binary from www.swig.org Maybe if this is replicated on other systems, we could add a note to the documentation mentioning this. 2] The setup.py script in QuantLib-Python does not reference "grid.i", which causes it to be missing from the distribution. This problem is also present in the latest CVS version; see http://tinyurl.com/49zqh 3] The SWIG sources did not contain the BarrierOption instrument (although they did have Barrier::Type), and also a few pricing engines. I've added those that I required; some may still be missing. I've attached a patch for #3 (it's rather trivial) against Quantlib-0.3.7, it should work for the CVS version too (behind a firewall, cannot access CVS). BTW, are there any plans to add a Python-specific documentation similiar to wxPython using Epydoc? I imagine some change in the SWIG bindings or generation options would be needed. http://www.wxpython.org/docs/api/ It's been real nice working with QuantLib :-) Regards, Ashish ------------------------------------------------------------------- Ashish Kulkarni +91-022-55928914 +91-09820549057
"This e-mail message may contain confidential,
proprietary or legally privileged information. It should not be used by anyone who is not the
original intended recipient. If you have erroneously received this message, please delete it
immediately and notify the sender. The recipient acknowledges that ICICI Bank or its subsidiaries and associated companies, (collectively "ICICI Group"), are unable to exercise control or ensure or guarantee the integrity of/over the contents of the information contained in e-mail
transmissions and further acknowledges that any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and no binding nature of the message shall be implied or assumed unless the
sender does so expressly with due authority of ICICI Group.Before opening any attachments please check them for viruses and defects."
|
Greetings,
At 10:20 02/11/2004, Ashish Kulkarni wrote: >I've been working with QuantLib-Python, and I've noted some issues >related to that. > >1] QL-Python doesn't work with SWIG 1.3.22; I initally downloaded that >(being the latest version) and compilation failed. I didn't go too much >into the causes, but when I switched to 1.3.21 (the one which was used >to generate the released version) everything worked smoothly. I tried >this on a Win2K system, with the prebuilt binary from www.swig.org >Maybe if this is replicated on other systems, we could add a note to the >documentation mentioning this. SWIG 1.3.22 hadn't been released at the time we released QuantLib 0.3.7, which is why the issue isn't mentioned. The version of QL-Python in CVS should work with the latest SWIG as far as I recall, but I'll check it. >2] The setup.py script in QuantLib-Python does not reference "grid.i", >which causes it to be missing from the distribution. This problem is >also present in the latest CVS version; see http://tinyurl.com/49zqh Ouch, right. Thanks. >3] The SWIG sources did not contain the BarrierOption instrument >(although they did have Barrier::Type), and also a few pricing engines. >I've added those that I required; some may still be missing. Yes, sadly the bindings tend to stay behind the library. >I've attached a patch for #3 (it's rather trivial) against >Quantlib-0.3.7, it should work for the CVS version too (behind a >firewall, cannot access CVS). Thanks, I'll add them as soon as I get a chance (the box on which I do QuantLib development is currently down.) >BTW, are there any plans to add a Python-specific documentation similiar >to wxPython using Epydoc? I imagine some change in the SWIG bindings or >generation options would be needed. Last I heard, someone was working on patching SWIG to generate docstrings in the bindings. That would allow PyDoc to work some magic. But I don't know whether that is ready for prime-time. >It's been real nice working with QuantLib :-) Thanks, Luigi |
hello, Luigi Ballabio wrote: [snip] >> 3] The SWIG sources did not contain the BarrierOption instrument >> (although they did have Barrier::Type), and also a few pricing engines. >> I've added those that I required; some may still be missing. > > Yes, sadly the bindings tend to stay behind the library. > I'm willing to take up maintaining the SWIG bindings (although I'll be using mostly the Python ones for now). Also, it looks likely that I'll be attempting to develop a QuantLib Java/JNI binding for my company sometime in the future, which I can (hopefully) contribute back to QuantLib. >> BTW, are there any plans to add a Python-specific documentation similiar >> to wxPython using Epydoc? I imagine some change in the SWIG bindings or >> generation options would be needed. > > Last I heard, someone was working on patching SWIG to generate > docstrings in the bindings. That would allow PyDoc to work some magic. > But I don't know whether that is ready for prime-time. The patch for that is already in SWIG CVS; see http://tinyurl.com/3zl9n BTW, does anyone know when is the release of QuantLib 0.3.8 expected? Thanks, Ashish
"This e-mail message may contain confidential,
proprietary or legally privileged information. It should not be used by anyone who is not the
original intended recipient. If you have erroneously received this message, please delete it
immediately and notify the sender. The recipient acknowledges that ICICI Bank or its subsidiaries and associated companies, (collectively "ICICI Group"), are unable to exercise control or ensure or guarantee the integrity of/over the contents of the information contained in e-mail
transmissions and further acknowledges that any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and no binding nature of the message shall be implied or assumed unless the
sender does so expressly with due authority of ICICI Group.Before opening any attachments please check them for viruses and defects."
|
Cheers,
At 05:29 03/11/2004, Ashish Kulkarni wrote: >Luigi Ballabio wrote: >[snip] > > Yes, sadly the bindings tend to stay behind the library. > >I'm willing to take up maintaining the SWIG bindings (although I'll be >using mostly the Python ones for now). You're welcome. Contact Ferdinando for write-access to CVS. Tell him I sent you :) (he's reading this anyway) > Also, it looks likely that I'll >be attempting to develop a QuantLib Java/JNI binding for my company >sometime in the future, which I can (hopefully) contribute back to QuantLib. Good. Are you planning to adapt the existing SWIG interfaces, or to hand-craft the bindings? > > Last I heard, someone was working on patching SWIG to generate > > docstrings in the bindings. That would allow PyDoc to work some magic. > > But I don't know whether that is ready for prime-time. > >The patch for that is already in SWIG CVS; see http://tinyurl.com/3zl9n Cool. As SWIG 1.3.23 is scheduled for release in a few days, we'd have time for adding this to 0.3.8. >BTW, does anyone know when is the release of QuantLib 0.3.8 expected? I created the 0.3.8 release branch a few days ago. Unfortunately, the laptop I use for QuantLib development broke soon after that, which will prevent me from working on it until I get it fixed or I get a replacement. But in any case, 0.3.8 should be out by the end of this month. Later, Luigi |
> You're welcome. Contact Ferdinando for write-access to CVS. Tell him I > sent you :) (he's reading this anyway) will do :-) >> Also, it looks likely that I'll >> be attempting to develop a QuantLib Java/JNI binding for my company >> sometime in the future, which I can (hopefully) contribute back to >> QuantLib. > > Good. Are you planning to adapt the existing SWIG interfaces, or to > hand-craft the bindings? I plan to adapt the existing SWIG interfaces to Java; however due to the non-dynamic nature of Java and absence of operator overloading there may be differences in the way things are handled. Maintaining seperate bindings isn't worth it ... :-) I've already given it a dry-run, and it seemed to do things reasonably well (didn't try to run it, though). I think it shouldn't take too much effort once I've understood out all the SWIG-Java interface options. Maybe we could have that done by 0.3.8, or a few weeks after that :-) Cheers, Ashish
"This e-mail message may contain confidential,
proprietary or legally privileged information. It should not be used by anyone who is not the
original intended recipient. If you have erroneously received this message, please delete it
immediately and notify the sender. The recipient acknowledges that ICICI Bank or its subsidiaries and associated companies, (collectively "ICICI Group"), are unable to exercise control or ensure or guarantee the integrity of/over the contents of the information contained in e-mail
transmissions and further acknowledges that any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and no binding nature of the message shall be implied or assumed unless the
sender does so expressly with due authority of ICICI Group.Before opening any attachments please check them for viruses and defects."
|
At 10:16 03/11/2004, Ashish Kulkarni wrote:
>I plan to adapt the existing SWIG interfaces to Java; however due to the >non-dynamic nature of Java and absence of operator overloading there may >be differences in the way things are handled. Maintaining seperate >bindings isn't worth it ... :-) No, it isn't. >I've already given it a dry-run, and it seemed to do things reasonably >well (didn't try to run it, though). I think it shouldn't take too much >effort once I've understood out all the SWIG-Java interface options. >Maybe we could have that done by 0.3.8, or a few weeks after that :-) Let's make it a few weeks after that :) 0.3.8 is almost finalized, and the only things I'd add at this time are bug-fixes, docs, and the odd small feature (such as adding %feature("autodoc") * to the wrappers.) Later, Luigi |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |