Questions Regarding Scipy in Pypy (Not a Feature Request)
I know there is no current plan to implement scipy in pypy, but searching the PyPy website, I was not able to find the reason. If it is not to be included as a feature due to lack of interest or developer time, I am offering to begin rewriting scipy in pure python (I have quite a bit of free time to do this). If it has been discussed and actively excluded from pypy, I would like to know that before I waste too much time rewriting it. I have an active interest in being able to use some modules which depend on scipy while using the PyPy interpreter (especially pyBrain). I have seen the hack on the pypy blog: http://morepypy.blogspot.com/2011/12/plotting-using-matplotlib-from-pypy.htm... I could simply use the hack myself, but unless there's a reason not too, I think it'd be nice to have scipy available as a pure python module (perhaps called scipypy in the same manner as numpy). -- Steven Jackson
Hi Steven. Thanks for getting to us about it. On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Steven Jackson <stevenjackson121@gmail.com> wrote:
I know there is no current plan to implement scipy in pypy, but searching the PyPy website, I was not able to find the reason.
If it is not to be included as a feature due to lack of interest or developer time, I am offering to begin rewriting scipy in pure python (I have quite a bit of free time to do this). If it has been discussed and actively excluded from pypy, I would like to know that before I waste too much time rewriting it.
I have an active interest in being able to use some modules which depend on scipy while using the PyPy interpreter (especially pyBrain). I have seen the hack on the pypy blog:
http://morepypy.blogspot.com/2011/12/plotting-using-matplotlib-from-pypy.htm...
I could simply use the hack myself, but unless there's a reason not too, I think it'd be nice to have scipy available as a pure python module (perhaps called scipypy in the same manner as numpy).
-- Steven Jackson
I would *think* that extending such a hack is the best way forward, but I'm not 100% sure about it. Numpy also requires finishing and the work has stalled recently (it's almost exclusively my fault, I have been doing other stuff recently), but we're definitely looking forward to implement a way of having scipy work one way or another. Btw - I'm not aware, but how hard would it be to port scipy to pure python & pure C with cffi in between? Cheers, fijal
I believe the reason is that they prefer to focus the development effort into the more "basic" Numpy and from that go on. Numpy is not fully implemented I am working (actually, right now I am only in the "thinking" state) on some modules of NumPy, maybe we could coordinate and give this a boost. On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Steven Jackson <stevenjackson121@gmail.com> wrote:
I know there is no current plan to implement scipy in pypy, but searching the PyPy website, I was not able to find the reason.
If it is not to be included as a feature due to lack of interest or developer time, I am offering to begin rewriting scipy in pure python (I have quite a bit of free time to do this). If it has been discussed and actively excluded from pypy, I would like to know that before I waste too much time rewriting it.
I have an active interest in being able to use some modules which depend on scipy while using the PyPy interpreter (especially pyBrain). I have seen the hack on the pypy blog:
http://morepypy.blogspot.com/2011/12/plotting-using-matplotlib-from-pypy.htm...
I could simply use the hack myself, but unless there's a reason not too, I think it'd be nice to have scipy available as a pure python module (perhaps called scipypy in the same manner as numpy).
-- Steven Jackson
_______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
I am definitely open to working on Numpy first, my only hesitation was that it might be hard to get spun up, and scipy seemed like something I could slice off and do (some of) by myself without accidentally conflicting with ongoing development efforts. If, as your replies have indicated, Numpy isn't being very actively developed, and it would be easy to get caught up and avoid conflicting with other developers, then I'd be glad to help there instead of independently trying to get scipy going. On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Daπid <davidmenhur@gmail.com> wrote:
I believe the reason is that they prefer to focus the development effort into the more "basic" Numpy and from that go on. Numpy is not fully implemented
I am working (actually, right now I am only in the "thinking" state) on some modules of NumPy, maybe we could coordinate and give this a boost.
I know there is no current plan to implement scipy in pypy, but searching the PyPy website, I was not able to find the reason.
If it is not to be included as a feature due to lack of interest or developer time, I am offering to begin rewriting scipy in pure python (I have quite a bit of free time to do this). If it has been discussed and actively excluded from pypy, I would like to know that before I waste too much time rewriting it.
I have an active interest in being able to use some modules which depend on scipy while using the PyPy interpreter (especially pyBrain). I have seen
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Steven Jackson <stevenjackson121@gmail.com> wrote: the
hack on the pypy blog:
http://morepypy.blogspot.com/2011/12/plotting-using-matplotlib-from-pypy.htm...
I could simply use the hack myself, but unless there's a reason not too,
I
think it'd be nice to have scipy available as a pure python module (perhaps called scipypy in the same manner as numpy).
-- Steven Jackson
_______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
-- Steven Jackson
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Steven Jackson <stevenjackson121@gmail.com> wrote:
I am definitely open to working on Numpy first, my only hesitation was that it might be hard to get spun up, and scipy seemed like something I could slice off and do (some of) by myself without accidentally conflicting with ongoing development efforts.
If, as your replies have indicated, Numpy isn't being very actively developed, and it would be easy to get caught up and avoid conflicting with other developers, then I'd be glad to help there instead of independently trying to get scipy going.
That sounds very good to me. The thing I started (and I'm not actively working on it for at least a week or two more) is to clean up stuff and try to reuse pure-python numpy part without changes
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Daπid <davidmenhur@gmail.com> wrote:
I believe the reason is that they prefer to focus the development effort into the more "basic" Numpy and from that go on. Numpy is not fully implemented
I am working (actually, right now I am only in the "thinking" state) on some modules of NumPy, maybe we could coordinate and give this a boost.
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Steven Jackson <stevenjackson121@gmail.com> wrote:
I know there is no current plan to implement scipy in pypy, but searching the PyPy website, I was not able to find the reason.
If it is not to be included as a feature due to lack of interest or developer time, I am offering to begin rewriting scipy in pure python (I have quite a bit of free time to do this). If it has been discussed and actively excluded from pypy, I would like to know that before I waste too much time rewriting it.
I have an active interest in being able to use some modules which depend on scipy while using the PyPy interpreter (especially pyBrain). I have seen the hack on the pypy blog:
http://morepypy.blogspot.com/2011/12/plotting-using-matplotlib-from-pypy.htm...
I could simply use the hack myself, but unless there's a reason not too, I think it'd be nice to have scipy available as a pure python module (perhaps called scipypy in the same manner as numpy).
-- Steven Jackson
_______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
-- Steven Jackson
_______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
Which source files/functions/line numbers should I take a look at, as specifically as possible? On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com>wrote:
I am definitely open to working on Numpy first, my only hesitation was
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Steven Jackson <stevenjackson121@gmail.com> wrote: that
it might be hard to get spun up, and scipy seemed like something I could slice off and do (some of) by myself without accidentally conflicting with ongoing development efforts.
If, as your replies have indicated, Numpy isn't being very actively developed, and it would be easy to get caught up and avoid conflicting with other developers, then I'd be glad to help there instead of independently trying to get scipy going.
That sounds very good to me. The thing I started (and I'm not actively working on it for at least a week or two more) is to clean up stuff and try to reuse pure-python numpy part without changes
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Daπid <davidmenhur@gmail.com> wrote:
I believe the reason is that they prefer to focus the development effort into the more "basic" Numpy and from that go on. Numpy is not fully implemented
I am working (actually, right now I am only in the "thinking" state) on some modules of NumPy, maybe we could coordinate and give this a boost.
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Steven Jackson <stevenjackson121@gmail.com> wrote:
I know there is no current plan to implement scipy in pypy, but searching the PyPy website, I was not able to find the reason.
If it is not to be included as a feature due to lack of interest or developer time, I am offering to begin rewriting scipy in pure python
(I
have quite a bit of free time to do this). If it has been discussed and actively excluded from pypy, I would like to know that before I waste too much time rewriting it.
I have an active interest in being able to use some modules which depend on scipy while using the PyPy interpreter (especially pyBrain). I have seen the hack on the pypy blog:
http://morepypy.blogspot.com/2011/12/plotting-using-matplotlib-from-pypy.htm...
I could simply use the hack myself, but unless there's a reason not
too,
I think it'd be nice to have scipy available as a pure python module (perhaps called scipypy in the same manner as numpy).
-- Steven Jackson
_______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
-- Steven Jackson
_______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
-- Steven Jackson
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Steven Jackson <stevenjackson121@gmail.com> wrote:
I know there is no current plan to implement scipy in pypy, but searching the PyPy website, I was not able to find the reason.
If it is not to be included as a feature due to lack of interest or developer time, I am offering to begin rewriting scipy in pure python (I have quite a bit of free time to do this).
Pretty much everything in scipy depends on some fortran libraries (scipy.linalg), so the first step would be to have some system that allow you to automatically wrap fortran through cffi. It is quite a pain because of fortran/C ABI issues, but you could focus on one platform only at first. David
Someone tried getting f2py working on pypy a while ago, a quick search turned up http://www.dalkescientific.com/writings/diary/archive/2011/11/09/f2pypy.html and a fork of code at https://bitbucket.org/pypy/f2pypy Perhaps that could be a starting point? Matti On 8/08/2012 8:05 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
I know there is no current plan to implement scipy in pypy, but searching the PyPy website, I was not able to find the reason.
If it is not to be included as a feature due to lack of interest or developer time, I am offering to begin rewriting scipy in pure python (I have quite a bit of free time to do this). Pretty much everything in scipy depends on some fortran libraries (scipy.linalg), so the first step would be to have some system that allow you to automatically wrap fortran through cffi. It is quite a
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Steven Jackson <stevenjackson121@gmail.com> wrote: pain because of fortran/C ABI issues, but you could focus on one platform only at first.
David _______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Matti Picus <matti.picus@gmail.com> wrote:
Someone tried getting f2py working on pypy a while ago, a quick search turned up http://www.dalkescientific.com/writings/diary/archive/2011/11/09/f2pypy.html and a fork of code at https://bitbucket.org/pypy/f2pypy
Perhaps that could be a starting point?
Yes, definitely, although there are tools which are better architected like fwrap (https://github.com/kwmsmith/fwrap). I would expect something based on f2py to be the fastest route, though. fwrap would more likely lend to something that could be contributed by and useful to both cpython and pypy-based implementations. David
David Cournapeau, 08.08.2012 23:59:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Matti Picus wrote:
Someone tried getting f2py working on pypy a while ago, a quick search turned up http://www.dalkescientific.com/writings/diary/archive/2011/11/09/f2pypy.html and a fork of code at https://bitbucket.org/pypy/f2pypy
Perhaps that could be a starting point?
Yes, definitely, although there are tools which are better architected like fwrap (https://github.com/kwmsmith/fwrap).
I would expect something based on f2py to be the fastest route, though. fwrap would more likely lend to something that could be contributed by and useful to both cpython and pypy-based implementations.
FWIW, another reason why fwrap is popular, besides a better design, is that it can automatically generate Cython declarations for a Fortran wrapper, so it already supports two targets. Adding PyPy as a third one would reduce the need for users to learn new tools. Stefan
participants (6)
-
David Cournapeau -
Daπid -
Maciej Fijalkowski -
Matti Picus -
Stefan Behnel -
Steven Jackson