[Python-Dev] A new webpage promoting Compiler technology for CPython

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Sat Feb 16 08:49:04 CET 2013


On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml at behnel.de> wrote:
> Hmm, I don't have the feeling that this discussion is leading anywhere
> (especially not on this list). After all, it's quite possible to fire up a
> PyPy runtime from a CPython runtime and have them talk to each other,
> letting each one do what it's good at. That doesn't make PyPy a "compiler
> for CPython", but at least it means that it doesn't fail completely to
> integrate with the rest of the world.
>
> There are arguments for both sides, which means in dubio pro reo, I guess.

If anyone is interested in fast Python code that integrates cleanly
with external C libraries, then the combination of PyPy and cffi
(http://cffi.readthedocs.org/en/latest/) should definitely be on their
list of candidates to consider. Now, it may be excluded quickly
because there's a CPython extension involved in the project that isn't
a trivial wrapper around an existing non-Python library (and thus
can't be easily replaced with cffi), but that's no excuse for not at
least considering the combination in the cases where it makes sense.

Yes, the PyPy team and scientific users of Python have a long history
of talking past each other (and abusing each other for the mutual lack
of understanding). However, that's no excuse for deliberately ignoring
the advantages JIT compilation can bring, when cffi has been created
specifically to give PyPy a typesafe (and JIT-transparent) way to
interface with any library that provides C bindings.

Regards,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list