On Apr 21, 2009, at 9:26 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:

> Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
>> I don't think we have to think of ourselves as in direct competition
>> with PyPy (and/or Unladen Swallow). Personally I'm more than happy to
>> use pure Python rather than Cython for the kind of things that can be
>> sped up by those projects anyway (makes for a shorter compile/run  
>> cycle).
>
> I do actually see PyPy as a direct competitor of Cython (much more  
> than
> Jython and IronPython, BTW), as both projects aim to compile Python  
> code
> to fast native code. Currently, we are faster and they are more  
> feature
> complete. But if we can have the cake and eat it, too...

It's also important to note that each has non-intersecting goals on  
top of making Python faster, and I could see them all being around  
for a long time. One thing that sets us apart is the ease at which we  
can integrate existing C (and soon C++/Fortran) code, which is  
extremely valuable. Our greatest weakness is that we are tied to the  
non-treadsafe CPython interpreter--my hope is that eventually CPython  
will be improved to use a concurrent garbage collector and its  
shipped modules fixed accordingly. (With the current trend of the  
number of cores increasing faster than the clockspeed, one could  
dedicate a core to GC alone if speed is a concern as it has been in  
the past...)

>> What I think sets Cython apart is that we add a superset to the  
>> Python
>> language for adding types; which are simply needed in some  
>> situations. I
>> think that is where we "compete".
>
> That's rather where we are beyond competition.
>
>
>> When PyPy runs as fast as CPython, perhaps PyPy can start  
>> supporting the
>> Cython type annotations (at least the pure Python mode ones); Jython
>> could support the same annotations in time, and so on.
>
> Let's wait and see, but I doubt that there will be a major interest in
> doing that. I actually find it more important for Cython to gain type
> inference mechanisms that lift the requirement for defining types  
> in the
> first place, at least for standard use cases.

+1, inference is something else that would be really nice to finally  
have. There was enough interest, however, to add function signature  
type annotations.

- Robert

_______________________________________________
Cython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev

Reply via email to