External RPython mailing list
Hi, To anyone interested, Sarvi(?) created an RPython mailing list (Thanks Bea for spotting this): http://pyppet.blogspot.com/2010/09/rpython-mailing-list.html The following paragraph should have been posted as a comment to that blog post, but it doesn't record my post no matter how much I try, so I'll put it here: """ Ah, sorry about the money issue. I didn't realize that you already sent it to us; I misunderstood that you would not send it at all after we told you that we don't have resources and motivation to make RPython more user-friendly (even with $200). Now I suppose that we can arrange for you to get the money back if you like, or else thank you properly for it if it's ours to keep anyway :-) """ About the non-money issue, I end up looking like the bad guy. I suppose I should not have tried to say and repeat "no" so many times in the previous thread in increasingly bad tones; now Sarvi points only to my most negative e-mail. A bientôt, Armin
Hi there Armin Rigo skrev:
Hi,
To anyone interested, Sarvi(?) created an RPython mailing list (Thanks Bea for spotting this):
http://pyppet.blogspot.com/2010/09/rpython-mailing-list.html
The following paragraph should have been posted as a comment to that blog post, but it doesn't record my post no matter how much I try, so I'll put it here:
""" Ah, sorry about the money issue. I didn't realize that you already sent it to us; I misunderstood that you would not send it at all after we told you that we don't have resources and motivation to make RPython more user-friendly (even with $200). Now I suppose that we can arrange for you to get the money back if you like, or else thank you properly for it if it's ours to keep anyway :-) """
About the non-money issue, I end up looking like the bad guy. I suppose I should not have tried to say and repeat "no" so many times in the previous thread in increasingly bad tones; now Sarvi points only to my most negative e-mail.
A bientôt,
Armin
Thanks for posting this Armin. Let´s focus on the future then. Maybe we should be clear in our documentation somewhere on where we stand regarding RPython and maybe give some friendly advice on how to get started with experimenting (because that is what it means trying out RPython for other purposes than what Pypy uses it for). And if more questions like these pop up we can refer the inquiries there? That way it´s the core dev team who expresses the views, in one voice so to say. Just a suggestion. Cheers Bea (
_______________________________________________ pypy-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
Hi, On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Bea During <bea@changemaker.nu> wrote:
Maybe we should be clear in our documentation somewhere on where we stand regarding RPython
What about renaming it first? There is at least one other project that uses the name RPython. What about something like InterpPy or InterpPython to make it clear that it's supposed to be used to write interpreters? It doesn't sound terrific but I don't really care -- so, comments welcome, but please no infinite discussion on the pros and cons of various names. A bientôt, Armin.
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Armin Rigo <arigo@tunes.org> wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Bea During <bea@changemaker.nu> wrote:
Maybe we should be clear in our documentation somewhere on where we stand regarding RPython
What about renaming it first? There is at least one other project that uses the name RPython. What about something like InterpPy or InterpPython to make it clear that it's supposed to be used to write interpreters? It doesn't sound terrific but I don't really care -- so, comments welcome, but please no infinite discussion on the pros and cons of various names.
While we're at it, how about splitting the translation toolchain from pypy interpreter? I don't mean on technical merits, it can still be the same or mostly the same source codebase, but more on the conceptual level, to have 2 different websites names etc.
Hi Maciej, On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com> wrote:
While we're at it, how about splitting the translation toolchain from pypy interpreter? I don't mean on technical merits, it can still be the same or mostly the same source codebase, but more on the conceptual level, to have 2 different websites names etc.
I don't care too much right now. My motivation was to make RPython *less* visible, not create a second website for the translation toolchain (which would make RPython more visible). A bientôt, Armin.
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Armin Rigo <arigo@tunes.org> wrote:
Hi Maciej,
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com> wrote:
While we're at it, how about splitting the translation toolchain from pypy interpreter? I don't mean on technical merits, it can still be the same or mostly the same source codebase, but more on the conceptual level, to have 2 different websites names etc.
I don't care too much right now. My motivation was to make RPython *less* visible, not create a second website for the translation toolchain (which would make RPython more visible).
I don't think it's hideable. What we can do instead is to leave some kind of description why it is like it is and what it is. Trying to hide it means to some people that we have an awesome tool that we don't want to share. Instead it's worth explaining why we don't share this (because it's eg hard to use)
A bientôt,
Armin.
Hi, On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't think it's hideable.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I'm not really trying to hide it. But I'm also not really trying to push it forward (which seems to be what creating a website for it would do). Armin
On 13/09/10 10:14, Armin Rigo wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't think it's hideable.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I'm not really trying to hide it. But I'm also not really trying to push it forward (which seems to be what creating a website for it would do).
well, I don't think that hiding it or pushing it backward is a good idea. In theory, we would like if other people start to use rpython to write interpreters. What we don't like is to use rpython as a general purpose language, but that's a slightly different issue, IMHO. ciao, Anto
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Antonio Cuni <anto.cuni@gmail.com> wrote:
On 13/09/10 10:14, Armin Rigo wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't think it's hideable.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I'm not really trying to hide it. But I'm also not really trying to push it forward (which seems to be what creating a website for it would do).
well, I don't think that hiding it or pushing it backward is a good idea. In theory, we would like if other people start to use rpython to write interpreters.
What we don't like is to use rpython as a general purpose language, but that's a slightly different issue, IMHO.
Is it really about interpreters? (what's interpreter-specific after all in RPython) or is it just that it's hard to use and does not integrate with CPython well?
ciao, Anto
On 13/09/10 10:27, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
Is it really about interpreters? (what's interpreter-specific after all in RPython) or is it just that it's hard to use and does not integrate with CPython well?
my point if that it's definitely good enough for writing interpreters. For the rest, it's a bit unknown (in the sense that nobody has ever tried), and we don't care about knowing :-)
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:50 +0200, Antonio Cuni wrote:
On 13/09/10 10:27, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
Is it really about interpreters? (what's interpreter-specific after all in RPython) or is it just that it's hard to use and does not integrate with CPython well?
my point if that it's definitely good enough for writing interpreters. For the rest, it's a bit unknown (in the sense that nobody has ever tried), and we don't care about knowing :-)
People have written apps and libs in RPython at several points in its history. And while i find it perfectly acceptable and fine for PyPy core devs to not want to care for usage of RPython for non-interpreter purposes i am a bit tired of this ever ongoing competition of expressing dis-interest and uttering discouraging statements. best, holger
From: Antonio Cuni <anto.cuni@gmail.com> To: Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com> Cc: pypy-dev@codespeak.net; Armin Rigo <arigo@tunes.org> Sent: Mon, September 13, 2010 1:50:34 AM Subject: Re: [pypy-dev] External RPython mailing list
On 13/09/10 10:27, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
Is it really about interpreters? (what's interpreter-specific after all in RPython) or is it just that it's hard to use and does not integrate with CPython well?
my point if that it's definitely good enough for writing interpreters. For
I believe Hart's Antler has done quite bit of work in RPython. Yeah, that said, more work to do there. My goal with my RPython thread, is that I believe that there is an implicitly static subset of Python that can be compiled into standalone executables and DLLs without needing JIT or VMs. Can serve 2 purposes. 1. Make standalone executables just like C/C++ code. 2. Write Python Extension modules that can be compiled into shared DLL modules for CPython and PyPy Looking through the various threads on PyPy, Shedskin and Cython, I believe its just a matter of time. Sarvi ----- Original Message ---- the
rest, it's a bit unknown (in the sense that nobody has ever tried), and we don't care about knowing :-) _______________________________________________ pypy-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
Hi. Speaking from a personal perspective here, I would help people write standalone executables using RPython. This has been tried (even with success) for small examples and works. However, for most places where it was tried, it was an ill-chosen tool for that purpose (where slight python optimizations or using JIT would work equally well) with RPython having sometimes bizarre limitations that we're not willing to work on. The second part (writing Python extensions) I think is not a very good target, but can be done. However, I don't want people telling me that I should work on it. If some people want to implement this, they can get my help. I think this defines rough outline where I'm (personally) willing to help or not to help people using RPython. On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 1:36 AM, Saravanan Shanmugham <sarvi@yahoo.com> wrote:
I believe Hart's Antler has done quite bit of work in RPython.
Yeah, that said, more work to do there.
My goal with my RPython thread, is that I believe that there is an implicitly static subset of Python that can be compiled into standalone executables and DLLs without needing JIT or VMs. Can serve 2 purposes. 1. Make standalone executables just like C/C++ code. 2. Write Python Extension modules that can be compiled into shared DLL modules for CPython and PyPy
Looking through the various threads on PyPy, Shedskin and Cython, I believe its just a matter of time.
Sarvi
From: Antonio Cuni <anto.cuni@gmail.com> To: Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com> Cc: pypy-dev@codespeak.net; Armin Rigo <arigo@tunes.org> Sent: Mon, September 13, 2010 1:50:34 AM Subject: Re: [pypy-dev] External RPython mailing list
On 13/09/10 10:27, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
Is it really about interpreters? (what's interpreter-specific after all in RPython) or is it just that it's hard to use and does not integrate with CPython well?
my point if that it's definitely good enough for writing interpreters. For
----- Original Message ---- the
rest, it's a bit unknown (in the sense that nobody has ever tried), and we don't care about knowing :-) _______________________________________________ pypy-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
2010/9/13 Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com>:
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Armin Rigo <arigo@tunes.org> wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Bea During <bea@changemaker.nu> wrote:
Maybe we should be clear in our documentation somewhere on where we stand regarding RPython
What about renaming it first? There is at least one other project that uses the name RPython. What about something like InterpPy or InterpPython to make it clear that it's supposed to be used to write interpreters? It doesn't sound terrific but I don't really care -- so, comments welcome, but please no infinite discussion on the pros and cons of various names.
While we're at it, how about splitting the translation toolchain from pypy interpreter? I don't mean on technical merits, it can still be the same or mostly the same source codebase, but more on the conceptual level, to have 2 different websites names etc.
-0. We don't need more websites/trees to maintain. Anyway, it's not clear to me where the split would be, since the translator and the python interpreter are very interdependent. -- Regards, Benjamin
No I didn't create the mailing list. Possibly Hart's Antler who did. And the money to PyPy had no strings attached. I really hope PyPy replaces CPython as the standard python sooner, rather than later. True. That yall are not interested in standardizing an implicitly static subset of Python that can be used to create compiled executables or python extension libraries. But if PyPy gains momentum, I am pretty sure this idea will gain momentum eventually. Keep the good work. Sarvi ----- Original Message ----
From: Armin Rigo <arigo@tunes.org> To: pypy-dev@codespeak.net Sent: Sat, September 11, 2010 7:57:41 AM Subject: [pypy-dev] External RPython mailing list
Hi,
To anyone interested, Sarvi(?) created an RPython mailing list (Thanks Bea for spotting this):
http://pyppet.blogspot.com/2010/09/rpython-mailing-list.html
The following paragraph should have been posted as a comment to that blog post, but it doesn't record my post no matter how much I try, so I'll put it here:
""" Ah, sorry about the money issue. I didn't realize that you already sent it to us; I misunderstood that you would not send it at all after we told you that we don't have resources and motivation to make RPython more user-friendly (even with $200). Now I suppose that we can arrange for you to get the money back if you like, or else thank you properly for it if it's ours to keep anyway :-) """
About the non-money issue, I end up looking like the bad guy. I suppose I should not have tried to say and repeat "no" so many times in the previous thread in increasingly bad tones; now Sarvi points only to my most negative e-mail.
A bientôt,
Armin _______________________________________________ pypy-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
participants (7)
-
Antonio Cuni -
Armin Rigo -
Bea During -
Benjamin Peterson -
holger krekel -
Maciej Fijalkowski -
Saravanan Shanmugham