RetroSearch Browse

Sat Feb 13 02:49:18 CET 2010 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-February/097641.html

Collin Winter wrote:
> Hey Maciej,
> 
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Snippet from:
>>
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/186247/diff2/5014:8003/7002
>>
>> *PyPy*: PyPy [#pypy]_ has good performance on numerical code, but is
>> slower than Unladen Swallow on non-numerical workloads. PyPy only
>> supports 32-bit x86 code generation. It has poor support for CPython
>> extension modules, making migration for large applications
>> prohibitively expensive.
>>
>> That part at the very least has some sort of personal opinion
>> "prohibitively",
> 
> Of course; difficulty is always in the eye of the person doing the
> work. Simply put, PyPy is not a drop-in replacement for CPython: there
> is no embedding API, much less the same one exported by CPython;
> important libraries, such as MySQLdb and pycrypto, do not build
> against PyPy; PyPy is 32-bit x86 only.

I think pointing out at least these two restrictions explicitly would be
helpful (since they put some objective bounds on the meaning of
"prohibitive" in this context).

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-February/097641.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython