On Nov 5, 2008, at 12:10 AM, Stefan Behnel 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.
I think the most immediate official milestone is being able to compile 100% of Cython code. This is the target for 1.0. Of course there are several other things (e.g. the constantly improving buffer support) that are not part of this goal but extremely valuable. I imagine once we hit that target things will still be in flux enough that inclusion into the Python stdlib will be premature at that point, but worth moving towards. Also, hopefully by then things will stabilize enough that the slower release cycle won't be as much of a burden. (I'm used to the 1-3 week release cycle of Sage). We will still have the less-stable development branch going for those who want/need to be on the cutting edge. One thing that is not clear is if a (sufficiently advanced?) user would be able to use the newer Cython with an older version of Python (say, if some projects/modules he needed weren't ported yet.) There is also the long term question of the parser which is very redundant with the one shipped with Python. (Would we try to migrate over to Python's ASTs? Could that be done without loosing the old-style cdef syntax?) - Robert _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
