On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Gael Varoquaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 04:28:11PM -0700, Fernando Perez wrote: > > I *could* make it pyrex/cython-valid, it's trivial but just adds noise > > IMHO... As Stefan said, pyrex is essentially unmaintained as far as > > publicly-visible development goes, while cython is very actively > > moving ahead and likely picking up better numpy support soon (thanks > > to Dag and other GSoC work), so why not just follow that? > > Because Cython is not yet shipped be all the major distros (including not > Enthought's EPD current Beta, AFAIK), so it rules out a fair amount of > people who cannot/do not want to install something not shipped.
Unfortunately this is a case where the tool that is distributed (pyrex) has serious limitations for our purposes, and will hopefully soon (as Cython grows numpy support) be simply unusable: anyone wanting numpy/.pyx use will HAVE to use cython. So in this case, the above argument doesn't really apply: if the shipped tool simply doesn't do what you need, having it available by default does you zero good. Cheers, f _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
