On Nov 15, 2009, at 11:44 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote: > Lisandro Dalcin, 15.11.2009 19:43: >> On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote: >>> Leon Sit, 14.11.2009 15:29: >>>> they are likely to be a separate project? >>> Cython is targeting the C programming language, not the CUDA >>> platform or >>> OpenCL. So I don't see an interest in *not* being separate projects. >> >> Stefan, I think you are wrong... Targeting CUDA or OpenCL would be >> more or less conceptually equivalent to Fortran interoperability and >> Kurt's work on fwrap. > > Interfacing with CUDA is different from what Copperhead does, > though. I > really don't see Cython generate CUDA /code/.
I agree. At the moment Cython is structured around generating semantically faithful C code, with the expectation that the full Python/C API is available. Copperhead looks like a very interesting project, but sufficiently distinct that it probably makes sense to be a separate project. For example, I don't see a bunch of CUDA specific code making its way into the Cython codebase, not at this stage anyways. It would be interesting to see support for this kind of thing as a plugin (e.g. for the SIMD types already referred to, or for optionally optimizing the map function), though of course we don't even have the concept of a plugin right now. - Robert _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
