On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> wrote: > Nick Coghlan, 12.03.2011 12:43: >> >> I posted my rough notes and additional write-ups for Wednesday's VM >> summit and Thursday's language summit: >> >> >> http://www.boredomandlaziness.org/2011/03/python-vm-summit-rough-notes.html >> >> http://www.boredomandlaziness.org/2011/03/python-vm-summit-somewhat-coherent.html >> >> http://www.boredomandlaziness.org/2011/03/python-language-summit-rough-notes.html >> >> http://www.boredomandlaziness.org/2011/03/python-language-summit-highlights.html > > It appears that there has been little mention of Cython at the summit, > despite of the speed of CPython being a major topic, according to the notes. > I can see several areas where Cython could help in speeding up core CPython, > one of the most obvious being compilation of standard library modules, and > JIT-like compilation of Python modules at import time. > > Nick mentioned that there was a discussion of making C-only modules > available as alternative Python implementations. I'd like to suggest the > opposite as well: make pure Python stdlib modules optionally compilable to > fast C code using Cython. The obvious advantages are a) speed and b) a > single code base for both Python and C modules. > > Stefan
The reason why there was no mention is probably because no one intimately familiar with Cython was there, and if they were - it was not brought up. If Cython supports PyPy - and Jython, and IronPython, your proposal makes sense. The reason for "pure" python implementation is so that other implementations can share the exact same standard library we have today. I don't see adding a cython version as helping that. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
