Hi, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > I think the most immediate official milestone is being able to > compile 100% of Cython code. This is the target for 1.0.
Did you really mean Cython here or Python? I think 100% Python is somewhat hard to prove. I would expect that we are pretty close to compiling Py2.4 code, and a bit further from compiling 2.5 code (which mainly includes generator expressions). Not sure about 2.6, which was a heavily moving target last time I checked. If you meant Cython, this requires a stable definition of what the Cython language actually is. > 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 I think that's somewhat orthogonal. I can imagine a stable language core with optional, advanced features. Both can well have different levels of maturity, both can mature in different release cycles - the more stable ones in the Python stdlib, and the more experimental or younger ones in independent Cython releases. > that inclusion into the Python stdlib will be premature at that > point, but worth moving towards. I'm more thinking in terms of stabilising the core language and major features. If we shift a bit of our current focus towards that goal, a core Cython release could even go into Py2.7. (Note that inclusion in Py3.1 would require migrating the source code to Py3 first, which is still a bit of additional work, but definitely worth it). > 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.) I'm not sure where you see the problem here. A user wouldn't replace the core Cython (i.e. everything else would keep working), but import a separate Cython install instead. Just an idea: I would imagine that we will (finally) have to lower-case the package/module names when we move into the stdlib, but we may keep (at least) the upper-case Cython package for the stand-alone release. We could then install with a lower-case package (or both) under Python 2.3-2.6, and with an upper-case package name on Python versions that already have a packaged Cython. > 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?) That's really a long-term question and something that we should discuss with the CPython developers. If we become an official part of CPython, I imagine that there will be ways to hook into the existing parser /somewow/. Stefan _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
