On Nov 20, 2007, at 3:11 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote: > The perception could easily arise that there is no interest in > giving an > impression of commitment, and thus not to expect a production-quality > Python interpreter in the foreseeable future. Is this perception > correct? Are people even talking about giving a level of commitment, > or > is this whole discussion uninteresting to the project altogether? I'd > like to know so I can adjust my own perception accordingly.
This thread is getting a bit repetitive. Until PyPy is in some non-marginal manner much better than cpython no one will be interested anyway. Its the niches that make a non canonical implementation successful. Getting any random project to run on top of pypy amounts not to 20% work but to 80% as most of the work will be writing very boring extension modules. Doing so is just not a worthwhile goal. I truly hope that the JIT and GC get the work they need. An implementation that performs 10x faster on numeric code will already spark a lot of interest, as has been seen in the case of psycho. Given that adding Ruby as an alternative frontend may very well be the only way to get this funded, I don't really understand why this is even being talked about. If you really want pypy to become "production quality", then Q&A is needed, so start a compatibility testing project or something... Alex --- Alexander Kellett PGP - 0x6BFA8EF3, FPR: DA65 D6DE 56A9 D715 EFB6 A948 B2EF 6622 6BFA 8EF3 _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
