Well, I tried to subscribe to capi-sig, but I didn't get a confirmation e-mail.
Regards Antoine. On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 18:25:25 +0200 Victor Stinner <vstin...@redhat.com> wrote: > I replied on capi-sig. > > 2018-07-31 18:03 GMT+02:00 Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net>: > > On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 15:34:05 +0200 > > Victor Stinner <vstin...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Antoine: would you mind to subscribe to the capi-sig mailing list? As > >> expected, they are many interesting points discussed here, but I would > >> like to move all C API discussions to capi-sig. I only continue on > >> python-dev since you started here (and ignored my request to start > >> discussing my idea on capi-sig :-)). > > > > Well, I responded to your e-mail discussion thread. I see more > > messages in this thread here than on capi-sig. ;-) > > > >> For example, PyPy uses different memory allocators depending on the > >> scope and the lifetime of an object. I'm not sure that you can > >> implement such optimization if you are stuck with reference counting. > > > > But what does reference counting have to do with memory allocators > > exactly? > > > >> > OS vendors seem to be doing a fine job AFAICT. And if I want a recent > >> > Python I just download Miniconda/Anaconda. > >> > >> Is it used in production to deploy services? Or is it more used by > >> developers? I never used Anaconda. > > > > I don't know, but there's no hard reason why you couldn't use it to > > deploy services (though some people may prefer Docker or other > > technologies). > > > >> > I think you don't realize that the C API is *already* annoying. People > >> > started with it mostly because there wasn't a better alternative at the > >> > time. You don't need to make it more annoying than it already is ;-) > >> > > >> > Replacing existing C extensions with something else is entirely a > >> > developer time/effort problem, not an attractivity problem. And I'm > >> > not sure that porting a C extension to a new C API is more reasonable > >> > than porting to Cython entirely. > >> > >> Do you think that it's doable to port numpy to Cython? It's made of > >> 255K lines of C code. > > > > Numpy is a bit special as it exposes its own C API, so porting it > > entirely to Cython would be difficult (how do you expose a C macro in > > Cython?). Also, internally it has a lot of macro-generated code for > > specialized loop implementations (metaprogramming in C :-)). > > > > I suppose some bits could be (re)written in Cython. Actually, the > > numpy.random module is already a Cython module. > > > >> > It's just that I disagree that removing the C API will make CPython 2x > >> > faster. > >> > >> How can we make CPython 2x faster? Why everybody, except of PyPy, > >> failed to do that? > > > > Because PyPy spent years working full time on a JIT compiler. It's also > > written in (a dialect of) Python, which helps a lot with experimenting > > and building abstractions, compared to C or even C++. > > > > Regards > > > > Antoine. > > _______________________________________________ > > Python-Dev mailing list > > Python-Dev@python.org > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > > Unsubscribe: > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/vstinner%40redhat.com _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
