Stefan Behnel wrote: > Michael Foord wrote: >> Moving more C extensions to an implementation based on ctypes would be >> enormously useful for PyPy, IronPython and Jython, but ctypes is not yet >> as portable as Python itself which could be an issue (although one worth >> resolving). > > In the same line, moving more extensions to a high-level language like Cython, > instead of writing them in straight C, would make a later switch to a > different environment a lot easier, as the extensions could be regenerated > with a modified Cython compiler (obviously minus some fixing of premature > optimisations and the like). Is using Cython for anything in Modules/ really an option? In my limited experiments with it, I did like it. But using it for Python standard library stuff doesn't look quite right to me: - Option 1: distribute Cython with Python and integrate into build process -- Ouch! - Option 2: only distribute generated source files -- developers still need to have Cython installed -- you have to trust Cython; who will really review the generated code? -- Gerhard
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4