Looks like we've gained a supporter here... Martin v. Löwis wrote: > Stefan Behnel wrote: >> The project has made inclusion into Python's stdlib a goal right from >> the beginning. > > Ah, that changes my view of it significantly. If the authors want to > contribute it to Python some day, I'm looking forward to that (assuming > that they then close their official branch, and make the version inside > Python the maintained one). > > That is also independent of whether standard library modules get written > in Cython. I would expect that some may (in particular, if they focus on > wrapping an external library), whereas others might stay what they are > (in particular, when they are in the real core of the interpreter). > >> ctypes makes sense for projects that do not require a high-speed >> interface, >> i.e. if you do major things behind the interface and only call into it >> from >> time to time, choosing ctypes will keep your code more portable without >> requiring a C compiler. However, if speed matters then it's hard to beat >> Cython even with hand-written C code. > > I would personally prefer a Cython integration over a ctypes one, for > the standard library (and supported inclusion of ctypes into Python > regardless). > > Regards, > Martin
I'm still for moving Cython to the stdlib one day, but I would prefer a somewhat closer "one day". What do the others think? If you agree, it would be good to make that on official milestone, and to collect and flag bugs in trac as relevant or blockers for this goal. That would allow us to see when we get closer, and to go back to python-dev when we think it's time. Stefan _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
