Well then, wouldn't it make sense for PyPy to use Shedskin and its
definition of Restricted Python?
I have heard repeatedly that PyPy RPython is very difficult to use.
Then why isn't PyPy using Shedskin to compile its PyPy-Jit?
Sarvi
On Sep 2, 11:59 pm, John Nagle wrote:
> On 9/2/2010 10:30 PM,
On 9/2/2010 10:30 PM, sarvi wrote:
On Sep 2, 2:19 pm, John Nagle wrote:
On 9/2/2010 1:29 AM, sarvi wrote:
When I think about it these restrictions below seem a very reasonable
tradeoff for performance.
Yes.
And I can use this for just the modules/sections that are performance
critica
sarvi, 03.09.2010 07:30:
It should technically be possible to allow Python to call a module
written in RPython?
What's "Python" here? CPython? Then likely yes. I don't see a benefit, though.
It should also compile RPython to a python module.so right?
Why (and how) would CPython do that?
I
On Sep 2, 2:19 pm, John Nagle wrote:
> On 9/2/2010 1:29 AM, sarvi wrote:
>
> > When I think about it these restrictions below seem a very reasonable
> > tradeoff for performance.
>
> Yes.
>
> > And I can use this for just the modules/sections that are performance
> > critical.
>
> Not quit
On 9/2/2010 1:29 AM, sarvi wrote:
When I think about it these restrictions below seem a very reasonable
tradeoff for performance.
Yes.
And I can use this for just the modules/sections that are performance
critical.
Not quite. Neither Shed Skin nor RPython let you call from
restricted
enerated C code to be just as fast as
Shedskin's
Afterall thats how the PyPy compiler is built, right? and we do want
that to be fast too?
Sarvi
On Sep 1, 11:39 pm, John Nagle wrote:
> On 9/1/2010 10:49 AM, sarvi wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Is there a pl
On 9/1/2010 10:49 AM, sarvi wrote:
Is there a plan to adopt PyPy and RPython under the python foundation
in attempt to standardize both.
I have been watching PyPy and RPython evolve over the years.
PyPy seems to have momentum and is rapidly gaining followers and
performance.
PyPy JIT and
sarvi, 02.09.2010 07:06:
Look at all the alternatives we have. Cython? Shedskin?
I'll take PyPy anyday instead of them
Fell free to do so, but don't forget that the choice of a language always
depends on the specific requirements at hand. Cython has proven its
applicability in a couple of lar
On Sep 1, 6:49 pm, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> sarvi gmail.com> writes:
> > Secondly I have always fantasized of never having to write C code yet
> > get its compiled performance.
> > With RPython(a strict subset of Python), I can actually compile it to
> > C/Machine code
>
> RPython is not suppo
On Sep 2, 3:49 am, sarvi wrote:
> Yet I see this forum relatively quite on PyPy or Rpython ? Any
> reasons???
For me, it's two major ones:
1. PyPy only recently hit a stability/performance point that makes it
worth checking out,
2. Using non-pure-python modules wasn't straightforward (at least
sarvi gmail.com> writes:
>
>
> Is there a plan to adopt PyPy and RPython under the python foundation
> in attempt to standardize both.
There is not.
>
> Secondly I have always fantasized of never having to write C code yet
> get its compiled performance.
> With
Is there a plan to adopt PyPy and RPython under the python foundation
in attempt to standardize both.
I have been watching PyPy and RPython evolve over the years.
PyPy seems to have momentum and is rapidly gaining followers and
performance.
PyPy JIT and performance would be a good thing for
12 matches
Mail list logo
