Yes, that's my concern. I take it as given that the CL community does
not have the resources to fully reimplement numpy from scratch. If one
grants me that premise, then building a FFI to numpy would be a better
investment of hours than cloning it.
Arguably investing in py4cl would be better than either. But other than
for personal satisfaction, cloning is a dominated choice.
I was hoping to hear that someone had gone over the C API with CFFI.
That leads me to a follow-up question: am I right that SWIG no longer
ships with a back end for emitting CFFI stubs? It seems like it was
dropped sometimes between versions 3 and 4.
Best,
R
On 10 Apr 2023, at 16:16, Marco Antoniotti wrote:
IMHO, it'd be easier and effective to band up together and FIRST write
a
proper API specification and THEN implement it in CL.
But Common Lispers are like academics: the "herding cats" applies.
Cheers
Marco
PS I am a Common Lisper AND an academic. You know what I mean...
On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 9:09 PM Robert Goldman <rpgold...@sift.info>
wrote:
Has anyone taken the Numpy C API and created a CFFI library based on
it?
I see some attempts to clone it in pure CL, but I would guess that
just
using it through its API might be easier and more effective.
