[pypy-dev] Comments from an observer

holger krekel hpk at trillke.net
Wed Dec 7 17:28:14 CET 2005

Hey Ben, 

just one additional note: we did say sometimes that we will do
our best to help someone working on such a tool ... it's not
too far off and actually quite some work has been spend on
improving and refining the translation process.  It just needs
someone with dedication and some time to think and experiment
a bit, tackling some minor issues and discussing/promoting 
larger issues.  

Moreover, the project is evolving in more directions
than are covered by the EU funding and the EU 
only partially funds development anyway.  The current
group cannot follow all interesting paths at the same 
time - although it sometimes may appear so :) 



On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 10:03 +0000, Ben.Young at risk.sungard.com wrote:
> First of all I would like to say that I think PyPy is an amazing project 
> and that you have all done a really great job. Also the comments I have on 
> the project are not aimed at any people in the project, more just at the 
> general direction it appears to be going in.
> PyPy is on the edge of something great. A maintainable, powerful, 
> flexible, fast interpreter is just what the python community needs. 
> However just when it seems that PyPy can start to have some real 
> significance in the Python world it seems like these benefits are being 
> delayed for more research work which may take a long time.
> For instance a way of writing a rpython module that could be compiled to a 
> Cpython extension or a PyPy extension would allow people to start using 
> PyPy now, and at the same time make faster, powerful extensions for 
> CPython while maintaining an upgrade path to PyPy. This would bring PyPy 
> to the attention of a lot of people giving more testers/developers.
> Also, most people on #pypy seem to ask about using pypy to compile their 
> simple python programs to c. Now, this doesn't seem like a great deal of 
> work away (better error messages etc), but they are (politely) told that 
> this is not what rpython is for. Now if rpython is not for this, why did 
> you write PyPy in it? The same arguments could be applied to most programs 
> (python is easier to read/maintain/write). I really can't see why 
> something as useful as rpthon should remain an implementation detail, and 
> again, exposing it would bring great exposure and benefits to the project.
> I don't want to come across like a moaner (and indeed, that's why I stop 
> writing on #pypy as felt I couldn't be enough of a positive voice), and 
> the only reason I'm writing this is because I think so much of the project 
> and think it has so much potential. The last thing I want to see is for 
> PyPy to become a great implemention with many powerful features, but then 
> find that it had missed its time by not being "results driven" enough. The 
> world doesn't need another powerful research/university language, it needs 
> a great production language and with PyPy I think Python could be that 
> language.
> Anyway, enough of my ranting. I'm sorry if I've offended anyone or 
> completely missed the point. I'll go back to being a hopefull lurker 
> again!
> Cheers,
> Ben
> _______________________________________________
> pypy-dev at codespeak.net
> http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev

More information about the Pypy-dev mailing list