Hi Simon,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 07:07:15PM -0700, Simon Burton wrote:
Do you think we could extend rffi to be able to
expose function calls to outside callers, so that eg.
we can make nifty cpython extension modules ?
It would be a simple matter to have a way to force genc to use specific
Hi Richard,
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 01:01:35PM -0700, Richard Emslie wrote:
Just a sidenote - rffi supports (and uses) macros. Not sure how this
will look like in a ctypes-based solution.
if you are talking c macros - this could be very problematic for the
llvm backend.
Anton (which I
Do you think we could extend rffi to be able to
expose function calls to outside callers, so that eg.
we can make nifty cpython extension modules ?
(i think this is number 3 in my list)
Simon.
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 13:03:16 +0200
Maciek Fijalkowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simon Burton wrote:
On Jun 16, 2007, at 1:37 PM, Maciek Fijalkowski wrote:
snip
Just a sidenote - rffi supports (and uses) macros. Not sure how this
will look like in a ctypes-based solution.
if you are talking c macros - this could be very problematic for the
llvm backend.
cheers - Richard
Hey,
On 6/20/07, Armin Rigo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[my questions]
That's a very good list of questions. Indeed, we don't have clear
answers for them yet, but just vague thoughts. I think it's fair to say
that we'll discuss this at EuroPython and make some commitments then;
for now we're
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 01:16:06PM +0200, Alexander Kellett wrote:
On 15 Jun 2007, at 13:04, Martijn Faassen wrote:
You could tell me that I'd be more productive if I contributed to the
JIT generator, but then I'd go away again and you'd lose a potential
contributor. If I can speed up my
Hey,
Christian Tismer wrote:
Whatever way we choose, I think it would be best for PyPy
if we try to be as user-friendly as possible, saying like
we believe we must change this and that immediately, but
we will not leave you in the rain, but actively help porting
your stuff.
This also
Armin Rigo wrote:
Hi Simon,
(This is also a follow-up on concerns raised by Christian on #pypy
today)
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 05:44:54PM -0700, Simon Burton wrote:
I hope we can do all this with rffi, but there are two really
cool things about rctypes:
1) it runs on cpython (our main
Hi Armin,
On 16.06.2007, at 19:10, Armin Rigo wrote:
Hi Simon,
(This is also a follow-up on concerns raised by Christian on #pypy
today)
Well, reacting a bit to it, here...
The reason why this stuff kept me busy thinking since
the meeting was the fact that we are about to trash
exactly the
I would be very, very careful about what people talk about.
Even if they talk about RPython and speed, they really don't know what
they're talking about. There are some reasons why they use python and
not ocaml or haskell for their purposes. One of the reasons is that it's
easy to write
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 11:11 +0200, Maciek Fijalkowski wrote:
I would be very, very careful about what people talk about.
quick question: your mail appears in my Mutt as a reply to my
previous mail (Hi Anto, all) but your mail is not meant
as relating to it specifically, right?
holger
holger krekel wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 11:11 +0200, Maciek Fijalkowski wrote:
I would be very, very careful about what people talk about.
quick question: your mail appears in my Mutt as a reply to my
previous mail (Hi Anto, all) but your mail is not meant
as relating to it
On 15 Jun 2007, at 13:04, Martijn Faassen wrote:
You could tell me that I'd be more productive if I contributed to the
JIT generator, but then I'd go away again and you'd lose a potential
contributor. If I can speed up my templating language using RPython I
might stick around. I realize that I
Maciek Fijalkowski wrote:
I would be very, very careful about what people talk about.
Even if they talk about RPython and speed, they really don't know what
they're talking about.
I understand that you need to be careful about not overselling RPython.
I would also suggest you be careful
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:45:54 +0200
Armin Rigo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any comments or objections? Are there people that already make heavy
use of rctypes, or the extension compiler?
Indeed. Mainly rctypes.
As well as an ever expanding use of libc,
we recently have interfaced to libSDL
Hi all,
Here is a summary of what we discussed today on #pypy-sync. We tried to
list the tasks that now lie ahead of us. There are a number of
relatively independent tasks, but there is also a knot of dependent
tasks that we'll have to untie bit by bit.
RCtypes and the extension compiler are
Armin Rigo wrote:
* In RPython, fijal worked on a more basic replacement for rctypes,
called rtti (almost finished already). It's a PyPy-specific interface
to call external functions in RPython. Calls written in this
interface can be compiled to good C code, but testing is a bit less
Maciek Fijalkowski wrote:
* What we do with ootypesystem backends and external functions? Right
now this is implemented by backends which tends to be a bit ugly
implementation. My idea would be to have backend-sensitive
implementations which access backend-specific RPython functions for
In a message of Fri, 15 Jun 2007 01:01:17 +0200, Antonio Cuni writes:
snip
Finally, a note which is not related with the work plan but to a
question that appeared in the logs; someone asked whether we want to
sell RPython as a stand-alone product.
Last sunday I gave a PyPy talk at Pycon italy
19 matches
Mail list logo
