On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 3:24 PM, David Cournapeau <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Charles R Harris <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:40 AM, David Cournapeau <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> IMO, what is needed the most is refactoring the internal to extract the >>> Python C API low level from the rest of the code, as I think that's the main >>> bottleneck to get more contributors (or get new core features more quickly). >>> >> >> What do you mean by "extract the Python C API"? > > Poor choice of words: I meant extracting the lower level part of > array/ufunc/etc... from its wrapping into the python C API (with the idea > that the latter could be done in Cython, modulo improvements in cython to > manage the binary/code size explosion). > > IOW, split numpy into core and core-py (I think dynd benefits a lots from > that, on top of its feature set).
Can you give some examples of these benefits? I'm kinda wary of refactoring-for-the-sake-of-it -- IME usually it's easier, more valuable, and more fun to refactor in the process of making some concrete improvement. Also, it's very much pie-in-the-sky at the moment, but if the pypy or numba or pyston compilers gained the ability to grok cython code directly, then having everything in cython instead of C could potentially allow for a single numpy code base to be shared between cpython and jitted-python, with the former working as it does now and the latter doing JIT loop fusion etc. -n -- Nathaniel J. Smith Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh http://vorpus.org _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
