On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 8:17 AM, Nathan Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 6:19 PM, Anne Archibald > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > What do people think about including cython code in scipy? > > > > Writing a substantial amount of code in a special-purpose language > like Cython is always risky. Will Cython exist in 5,10,15 years? > > I have little doubt that in 10 years I'll still be able to compile the > C/C++ codes I develop today. Furthermore, if Cython/SWIG/SciPy/NumPy > disappeared overnight I'd still have a decent library to work with. > IMO using Cython for one-off application or wrappers is fine, but > large-scale Cython implementation is probably a bad long-term > approach.
Isn't this a similar (if not the same) problem when writing your code using SWIG? Let's take sparsetools.i as an example, it also contains a lot of non python, non C code. So one needs to depend (and maintain!) SWIG. Well, Cython is a lot more lightweight and more robust solution imho. Of course it'd be great if the Cython code would also be a regular Python code, but that will still take some time. But they seem to like it, for example when I first learned about Cython, I told Robert and William -- why to use this ugly "for i from 1 <= i < dim:", why not to use the python way "for i in range(1, dim):"? And Robert has implemented this in less than a month. The next step could be to generate Cython code from regular Python code with annotations in comments or strings imho. But even if Cython stays as yet another language -- it's still easier and less error prone than to write the C code by hand. Ondrej _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
