Any news from the IronPython port?
Hi, subject says it all. The port to IronPython appears to run completely in stealth mode, so I wonder if it has become any usable yet, or if the project was already swept under the carpet and buried for good. Stefan
Hi Stefan, Definitely not buried for good, though we haven't made a lot of changes recently. :) We used it for porting SciPy to .NET and re-wrote a large number of the SciPy C module implementations in Cython. It is generally stable and produces good code within the set of features that were needed (by no means has feature parity with the CPython version). In general, I have been quite happy with the results given that it is possible to generate interfaces for two Python implementations from a single source. Of course, it is not free. One can, in general, not take a NumPy-heavy Cython file and just generate source code for IronPython. Because IronPython and NumPy for .NET do not share any common C APIs we had to wrap some of the APIs and in other cases switch to using Python notation and/or call the new Python-independent NumPy core API (present only in the refactored version). Overall, I think it's a good start and holds some promise for generating re-targetable native wrappings, but there is still plenty of work to do to make it more accessible. Regards, Jason On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> wrote:
Hi,
subject says it all. The port to IronPython appears to run completely in stealth mode, so I wonder if it has become any usable yet, or if the project was already swept under the carpet and buried for good.
Stefan ______________________________**_________________ cython-devel mailing list cython-devel@python.org http://mail.python.org/**mailman/listinfo/cython-devel<http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel>
-- *Jason McCampbell* Enthought, Inc. 512.536.1057 (Office) 512.850.6069 (Mobile) jmccampbell@enthought.com
Hi, On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Jason McCampbell <jmccampbell@enthought.com> wrote:
Hi Stefan, Definitely not buried for good, though we haven't made a lot of changes recently. :) We used it for porting SciPy to .NET and re-wrote a large number of the SciPy C module implementations in Cython.
That sounds very useful. Can these re-writings be proposed as merges into the scipy tree? Did you have time to benchmark the implementations? Thanks a lot, Matthew
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Jason McCampbell <jmccampbell@enthought.com> wrote:
Hi Stefan, Definitely not buried for good, though we haven't made a lot of changes recently. :) We used it for porting SciPy to .NET and re-wrote a large number of the SciPy C module implementations in Cython. It is generally stable and produces good code within the set of features that were needed (by no means has feature parity with the CPython version). In general, I have been quite happy with the results given that it is possible to generate interfaces for two Python implementations from a single source. Of course, it is not free. One can, in general, not take a NumPy-heavy Cython file and just generate source code for IronPython. Because IronPython and NumPy for .NET do not share any common C APIs we had to wrap some of the APIs and in other cases switch to using Python notation and/or call the new Python-independent NumPy core API (present only in the refactored version). Overall, I think it's a good start and holds some promise for generating re-targetable native wrappings, but there is still plenty of work to do to make it more accessible. Regards, Jason
Thanks for the status update--is the code available somewhere (e.g. as a forked git repo)? Is it something that would be worth merging, or at this point is it mostly hacked up to just do what you need it to for SciPy? - Robert
Robert Bradshaw, 19.07.2011 05:57:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Jason McCampbell wrote:
Definitely not buried for good, though we haven't made a lot of changes recently. :) We used it for porting SciPy to .NET and re-wrote a large number of the SciPy C module implementations in Cython. It is generally stable and produces good code within the set of features that were needed (by no means has feature parity with the CPython version). In general, I have been quite happy with the results given that it is possible to generate interfaces for two Python implementations from a single source. Of course, it is not free. One can, in general, not take a NumPy-heavy Cython file and just generate source code for IronPython. Because IronPython and NumPy for .NET do not share any common C APIs we had to wrap some of the APIs and in other cases switch to using Python notation and/or call the new Python-independent NumPy core API (present only in the refactored version). Overall, I think it's a good start and holds some promise for generating re-targetable native wrappings, but there is still plenty of work to do to make it more accessible. Regards, Jason
Thanks for the status update--is the code available somewhere (e.g. as a forked git repo)? Is it something that would be worth merging, or at this point is it mostly hacked up to just do what you need it to for SciPy?
The code is here: https://bitbucket.org/cwitty/cython-for-ironpython/overview No idea what the status is, but it hasn't been updated for a while. Stefan
participants (4)
-
Jason McCampbell -
Matthew Brett -
Robert Bradshaw -
Stefan Behnel