Gary, Ironclad has a mailing list where all updates are posted; it's pretty low traffic so you might want to join. You can sign up here: <http://groups.google.com/group/c-extensions-for-ironpython?hl=en>
Regards, Giles Gary Kopp wrote: > > Thanks for the info, Curt. Stupid of me – I didn’t even stop to think > about the issue of binary extensions. I absolutely need numpy! I’ll > track Ironclad’s progress now that you’ve made me aware of it. > Meanwhile, I’ll think about using Python.Net in the interim, and just > try to “embed” NLTK (GIL and all) in my C# app. > > --Gary > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Curt > Hagenlocher > *Sent:* Monday, March 24, 2008 3:59 PM > *To:* Discussion of IronPython > *Subject:* Re: [IronPython] Sanity Check re. Legacy Python Code > > As I understand it, the goal of IronPython is to support the running > of that kind of application -- provided that it doesn't use any binary > extensions[1]. The NTLK webpage is a bit vague on that count, > suggesting that "some users may require" numpy and matplotlib. If > you're not one of "those users", you should give it a try! > > Of course, there's some chance that NLTK won't work correctly under > 2.0b1; your reports in that regard will help all of us by driving > IronPython closer to CPython compatibility. > > 1: but see also > http://ironpython-urls.blogspot.com/2008/02/ironclad-01-released.html > -- for which numpy support is an explicit goal > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Gary Kopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > Would I be correct in assuming that it is _not_ currently the intent that > IronPython run "arbitrary" existing Python code? I am interested in making > use of the Natural Language Toolkit (NLTK), a huge Python 2.5 application, > in a .NET environment. Clearly, the most powerful approach would be to use > IronPython, but I'm guessing (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that > current limitations in the IronPython 2.0b1 implementation are likely to > present many challenges in running/porting arbitrary "legacy" Python apps. > My purpose in writing this is simply to find out whether I should even > bother attempting such a feat. > > --Gary Kopp > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com <mailto:Users@lists.ironpython.com> > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > -- Giles Thomas MD & CTO, Resolver Systems Ltd. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +44 (0) 20 7253 6372 Try out Resolver One! <http://www.resolversystems.com/get-it/> (Free registration required) 17a Clerkenwell Road, London EC1M 5RD, UK VAT No.: GB 893 5643 79 Registered in England and Wales as company number 5467329. Registered address: 843 Finchley Road, London NW11 8NA, UK _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
