Hi Armin, Thanks for the clarification!
I was wondering: Why is it that RPython is not a good general purpose language? In the original paper (http://rpython.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/rpython-DLS08.pdf), it is said: > The result is a language that is more expressive than C# and Java, but > which does not compromise runtime efficiency. RPython was initially > designed for the specific purpose of implementing PyPy [25] (a Python > interpreter written in Python), but it has grown into a full-fledged > language in its own right. > > Currently, RPython can be used in many contexts: to develop > stand-alone programs, such as the Standard Interpreter itself; to > write highly efficient extension modules for CPython, which could only > be written in C in the past; to develop dynamic web applications > without the need to write JavaScript code; to produce efficient > libraries of classes and functions to be used by other .NET and Java > programs. In particular, RPython can be the ideal companion for all > those CPython, IronPython and Jython developers that so far have been > forced to write the parts of their programs that need high performance > in C, C# or Java. I think, in general, RPython looks quite nice. I have static types via automatic type inference. I could use C or C++ for the same tasks but I like the Python syntax. I could also use Cython but I don't really see much the difference between Cython and RPython, except that RPython does automatic type inference and is a strict subset of Python, while Cython is explicit manifest typing. (Note that I also asked the same question here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17134479/why-do-people-say-that-rpython-is-an-unpleasant-language-to-program-in ) Regards, Albert On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Armin Rigo <ar...@tunes.org> wrote: > Hi Albert, > > On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Albert Zeyer <alb...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>> You may or may not get help with your questions: see >>> http://doc.pypy.org/en/latest/faq.html#do-i-have-to-rewrite-my-programs-in-rpython >> >> Well, not quite. > > No, sorry for the misunderstanding :-) What I meant is that your > questions may be possibly valid, but I was pointing you to this FAQ > entry that explains why we (= the general PyPy developers) are not > really interested in this direction, and which lists some of our > reasons for that. There is notably the fact that RPython is not meant > as a general language used to produce stand-alone C libraries. It's > certainly possible to make one in theory, but cumbersome. That's what > I meant with "you may not get help with your questions". > > > A bientôt, > > Armin. _______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
