R. David Murray, 18.04.2011 14:30: > On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:36:20 +0100, Paul Moore wrote: >> On 18 April 2011 08:05, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote: >>> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 4:19 AM, Raymond Hettinger wrote: >>> >>>> The PEP seems to be predicated on a notion that anything written in C is >>>> bad and that all testing is good. >>> >>> Sounds about right >> >> I disagree. To me, a Python without libraries such as os, zlib, >> zipfile, threading, etc wouldn't be much use (except in specialised >> circumstances). OK, that means that alternative implementations need >> to do extra work to implement equivalents in their own low-level >> language, but so be it (sorry!) > > I think Maciej left out an "only" in that sentence. If you say "only C", > then the sentence makes sense, even when applied to modules that *can* > only be written in C (for CPython). That is, not having a Python version > is bad. Necessary in many cases (or not worth the cost, for external > library wrappers), but wouldn't it be nicer if it wasn't necessary? FWIW, there is a proposed GSoC project that aims to implement a Cython backend for PyPy, either using ctypes or PyPy's own FFI. That would basically remove the need to write library wrappers in C for both CPython and PyPy, and eventually for IronPython, which also has a Cython port in the making. Not sure how Jython fits into this, but I wouldn't object to someone writing a JNI backend either. Stefan
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