[Numpy-discussion] My GSoC Proposal to Implement a Subset of NumPy for PyPy

Dan Roberts ademan555@gmail....
Tue Apr 20 21:38:28 CDT 2010

Thanks for the reply.  You're certainly right that your work is extremely
beneficial to mine.  At present I'm afraid a great deal of NumPy C code
isn't easily reusable and it's great you're addressing that.  I may not have
been thinking in line with Maciej, but I was thinking ufuncs would be
written in pure Python and jit compiled to an efficient form.  (We can make
lots of nice assumptions about them) That said, I think being able to write
generic ufuncs is a very good idea, and absolutely doable.

On Apr 20, 2010 7:48 AM, "Travis Oliphant" <oliphant@enthought.com> wrote:

On Apr 16, 2010, at 11:50 PM, Dan Roberts wrote:

> Hello NumPy Users,
>     Hi everybody, my name i...

Hi Daniel,

This sounds like a great project, and I think it has promise.   I would
especially pay attention to the requests to make it easy to write ufuncs and
generalized ufuncs in RPython.   That has the most possibility of being
immediately useful.

Your timing is also very good.    I am going to be spending some time
re-factoring NumPy to separate out the CPython interface from the underlying
algorithms.   I think this re-factoring should help you in your long-term
goals.   If you have any input or suggestions while the refactoring is
taking place, we are always open to suggestions and criticisms.

Thanks for writing a NumPy-related proposal.

Best regards,


Daniel Roberts

> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discuss...

Travis Oliphant
Enthought Inc.

NumPy-Discussion mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20100420/c37c7db0/attachment-0001.html 

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list