[IronPython] Sanity Check re. Legacy Python Code

[Giles Thomas]

Gary,

Ironclad has a mailing list where all updates are posted; it's pretty 
low traffic so you might want to join. You can sign up here: 
<http://groups.google.com/group/c-extensions-for-ironpython?hl=en>


Regards,

Giles


Gary Kopp wrote:
>
> Thanks for the info, Curt. Stupid of me – I didn’t even stop to think 
> about the issue of binary extensions. I absolutely need numpy! I’ll 
> track Ironclad’s progress now that you’ve made me aware of it. 
> Meanwhile, I’ll think about using Python.Net in the interim, and just 
> try to “embed” NLTK (GIL and all) in my C# app.
>
> --Gary
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com 
> [mailto:users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com] *On Behalf Of *Curt 
> Hagenlocher
> *Sent:* Monday, March 24, 2008 3:59 PM
> *To:* Discussion of IronPython
> *Subject:* Re: [IronPython] Sanity Check re. Legacy Python Code
>
> As I understand it, the goal of IronPython is to support the running 
> of that kind of application -- provided that it doesn't use any binary 
> extensions[1]. The NTLK webpage is a bit vague on that count, 
> suggesting that "some users may require" numpy and matplotlib. If 
> you're not one of "those users", you should give it a try!
>
> Of course, there's some chance that NLTK won't work correctly under 
> 2.0b1; your reports in that regard will help all of us by driving 
> IronPython closer to CPython compatibility.
>
> 1: but see also 
> http://ironpython-urls.blogspot.com/2008/02/ironclad-01-released.html 
> -- for which numpy support is an explicit goal
>
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Gary Kopp <geez4 at runbox.com 
> <mailto:geez4 at runbox.com>> wrote:
>
> Would I be correct in assuming that it is _not_ currently the intent that
> IronPython run "arbitrary" existing Python code? I am interested in making
> use of the Natural Language Toolkit (NLTK), a huge Python 2.5 application,
> in a .NET environment. Clearly, the most powerful approach would be to use
> IronPython, but I'm guessing (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that
> current limitations in the IronPython 2.0b1 implementation are likely to
> present many challenges in running/porting arbitrary "legacy" Python apps.
> My purpose in writing this is simply to find out whether I should even
> bother attempting such a feat.
>
> --Gary Kopp
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com <mailto:Users at lists.ironpython.com>
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>   


-- 
Giles Thomas
MD & CTO, Resolver Systems Ltd.
giles.thomas at resolversystems.com
+44 (0) 20 7253 6372

Try out Resolver One! <http://www.resolversystems.com/get-it/>
(Free registration required)

17a Clerkenwell Road, London EC1M 5RD, UK
VAT No.: GB 893 5643 79 
Registered in England and Wales as company number 5467329.
Registered address: 843 Finchley Road, London NW11 8NA, UK