Wouldn't Cython be a bit big for the stdlib? It would be the largest single piece of the standard library, with the possible exception of Tkinter.
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 12:10 AM, Stefan Behnel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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. > _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
