@2sn could you confirm that this patch works? You can test by checking out this PR and setting upnumpy viaspin run $SHELL and then going on to build the code you are using.

@HaoZeke Thank you very much for the fix!

I installed using

pip install git+https://github.com/numpy/numpy.git@refs/pull/27695/merge

Yes, it is including thelanedata module. Interestingly, the allocatable module variabletheta, however, is not listed bydir

In [9]: dir(laneemden._solver.lanedata)Out[9]: ['__call__', '__class__', '__delattr__', '__dir__', '__doc__', '__eq__', '__format__', '__ge__', '__getattribute__', '__getstate__', '__gt__', '__hash__', '__init__', '__init_subclass__', '__le__', '__lt__', '__ne__', '__new__', '__reduce__', '__reduce_ex__', '__repr__', '__setattr__', '__sizeof__', '__str__', '__subclasshook__', 'maxdata', 'ndata']

but it is accessible, and returnsNone if not allocated and returns the array when allocated. Even when allocated, however, it is not listed.

In [11]: laneemden._solver.lanedata.<TAB>maxdata ndata   In [11]:

This may not be new behaviour (I do not recall having tried this before), but is a bit curious, and might be confusing.

Before allocating

In [5]: laneemden._solver.lanedata.thetaIn [6]:

and after allocating (laneemden.solver.test())

In [10]: laneemden._solver.lanedata.thetaOut[10]: array([[ 1.00000000e+00,  0.00000000e+00],       [ 9.99999999e-01, -2.03450521e-05],       [ 9.99999998e-01, -4.06901040e-05],       ...,       [ 5.09606183e-06, -4.24312354e-02],       [ 2.50628767e-06, -4.24304844e-02],       [-8.34406605e-08, -4.24297334e-02]])In [11]:

Awesome, thanks for the quick confirmation.

That is kind of odd. I see its because allocatable arrays get proxied into a dimension helpercall f2pysetupfunc(maxdata,f2py_lanedata_getdims_theta,ndata).

This shouldn't be new behavior, but it is definitely worth reporting (and fixing).

@HaoZeke should we merge this as a fix toCOMMON handling and leave the other part for later?

@HaoZeke should we merge this as a fix toCOMMON handling and leave the other part for later?

Yup this fixes thecommon and backwards compatibility. There's an issue for the additional issue so this should be good to go.

Thanks@HaoZeke. It might be nice to backport this, and it probably deserves a mention in the release notes

@charris a backport would be great, since this also fixes#27167

I'll add a release note in a new PR.

EDIT: Done in#27730