[Numpy-discussion] Proposed Roadmap Overview
Charles R Harris
Fri Feb 17 20:04:01 CST 2012
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Matthew Brett <firstname.lastname@example.org>wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Charles R Harris
> <email@example.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 4:44 PM, David Cournapeau <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > wrote:
> >> I don't think c++ has any significant advantage over c for high
> >> performance libraries. I am not convinced by the number of people
> >> either: it is not my experience that c++ is easier to maintain in a open
> >> source context, where the level of people is far from consistent. I
> >> many people did not contribute to numoy because it is in c instead if
> >> While this is somehow subjective, there are reasons that c is much more
> >> common than c++ in that context.
> > I think C++ offers much better tools than C for the sort of things in
> > The compiler will take care of lots of things that now have to be hand
> > crafted and I wouldn't be surprised to see the code size shrink by a
> > significant factor.
> >> I would much rather move most part to cython to solve subtle ref
> >> issues, typically.
> > Not me, I'd rather write most stuff in C/C++ than Cython, C is cleaner ;)
> > Cython good for the Python interface, but once past that barrier C is
> > easier, and C++ has lots of useful things.
> Maybe a straw poll of the number of recent contributors to numpy who know:
> would help resolve this.
> I suspect using C++ would reduce the number of people who feel able to
> contribute, compared to:
> Simplifying the C code
> Rewriting in Cython
> Unless there is some reason to think that neither of these approaches
> would work in the particular case of numpy?
How about a different variation. How many people writing Python would
happily give up the following:
3) default types
5) automatic dellocation of memory
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NumPy-Discussion