Jacob Hall?n, 18.10.2011 18:41:
I'd just like to note that the compelling reason for PyPy to develop numpy
support is popular demand. We did a survey last spring, in which an
overwhelming number of people asked for numpy support. This indicates that
there is a large group of people who will
On 10/18/2011 02:41 PM Armin Rigo wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 14:19, Stefan Behnelstefan...@behnel.de wrote:
The other situation is where PyPy does its own thing and supports some NumPy
code that happens to run faster than in CPython, while other code does not
work at all, with the
Hi there
Maciej Fijalkowski skrev 2011-10-17 10:30:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Alex Pyattaevalex.pyatt...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a fully-functional wireless network simulation tool written in
pypy+swig. Is that nice? Have couple papers to refer to as well. If you want I
could write a
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Antonio Cuni anto.c...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19/10/11 13:42, Antonio Cuni wrote:
I'm not sure to interpret your sentence correctly.
Are you saying that you would still want a pypy+numpy+scipy,
even if it ran things slower than CPython? May I ask why?
ah
Hello Gary,
On 19/10/11 15:38, Gary Robinson wrote:
You would like pypy+numpy+scipy so that you could write fast
python-only algorithms and still use the existing libraries. I
suppose this is a perfectly reasonable usecase, and indeed
the current plan does not focus on this.
Yes. That is
You would like pypy+numpy+scipy so that you could write fast
python-only algorithms and still use the existing libraries. I
suppose this is a perfectly reasonable usecase, and indeed
the current plan does not focus on this.
Yes. That is exactly what I want.
However, I'd like to underline
I think the original topic of this discussion is numpy, not scipy.
The answer is that I don't know. I am sure that people will
reimplement whatever module is needed, or design a generic but slower
way to interface with C a la cpyext, or write a different C API, or
rely on Cython versions of
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:38 -0400, Gary Robinson wrote:
By the way, did you ever considered the possibility of running pypy and
cpython side-by-side?
You do your pure-python computation on pypy, then you pipe them (e.g. by
using execnet) to a cpython process which does the processing
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Leonardo Santagada santag...@gmail.com wrote:
Why not move more of scipy to cython/ctypes? That is what you guys
want for the future, and then it would not make anyone have to work on
something they have no interest in.
Independently of pypy's direction
