[Python-Dev] 2.4 news reaches interesting places

Michael Walter michael.walter at gmail.com
Thu Dec 9 22:43:19 CET 2004

If I parse you correctly, this would be great.

- Michael

On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 16:37:59 -0500, Phillip J. Eby
<pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> At 04:11 PM 12/9/04 -0500, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
> >On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 17:39 -0500, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> >
> > > The only thing that will fix the PR issue is to have a Python compiler
> > > distributed as part of the language.  It doesn't matter if it doesn't
> > > support the full generality of Python, or even if it doesn't speed many
> > > operations up much.  The only real requirements are that it can be used to
> > > produce "native" executables, and that it be an official part of the
> > > language, not a separately-distributed tool like Psyco or Pyrex.  Then, it
> > > will perhaps be a sufficient "security blanket" to stop people FUDding
> > > about it.
> >
> >I am aware that Pyrex is still in flux, so perhaps it is too soon to
> >propose this even for 2.5, but I think it's worth bringing up anyway: I
> >would like Pyrex to be distributed with the Python core.  I agree that
> >it should be modified to produce full .exe files and not just .dlls on
> >Windows, but many potential users *are* seriously concerned about
> >efficiency and not just simplifying distribution.
> +1 on all the stuff you said, with one minor exception.  Pyrex-the-language
> is often unpythonically ugly and verbose at present.  If Python had an
> official syntax for optional static type declaration, Pyrex's syntax could
> be aligned with that, and that would at least eliminate most of the inline
> 'cdef' ugliness, leaving only C type declarations and Python property
> declarations as the main syntax issues to be resolved.  (Maybe by using
> something like the 'ctypes' API, and having the compiler recognize that
> API, such that C is directly callable from Python anyway, so compiling or
> interpreting Python makes no difference to ability to access C...  but I
> digress.)
> Of course, this would take some effort from the core developers, especially
> Guido, to consider the various syntax needs and formulate official
> solutions.  But if it were done, the Python-vs.-Pyrex distinction could
> fade away altogether, replaced with the meme, "just add type declarations
> to slow parts, and tell Python you want the module compiled to C."
> IOW, if Pyrex is merely the name of a compiler, not a separate language,
> then our master plan for world domination is complete.  :)
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/michael.walter%40gmail.com

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list