py2c - an open source Python to C/C++ is looking for developers

Discussion in 'Python' started by maniandram01@gmail.com, Jul 30, 2012.

  1. Guest

    I created py2c ( http://code.google.com/p/py2c )- an open source Python to C/C++ translator!
    py2c is looking for developers!
    To join create a posting in the py2c-discuss Google Group or email me!
    Thanks
    PS:I hope this is the appropiate group for this message.
    , Jul 30, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. 2012/7/30 <>:
    > I created py2c ( http://code.google.com/p/py2c )- an open source Python to C/C++ translator!
    > py2c is looking for developers!
    > To join create a posting in the py2c-discuss Google Group or email me!
    > Thanks
    > PS:I hope this is the appropiate group for this message.
    > --
    > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list


    It looks like a very very hard task, and really useful or for exercise?

    The first few lines I've seen there are the dangerous * imports and
    LazyStrin looks like a typo..

    from ast import *
    import functools
    from c_types import *
    from lazystring import *
    #constant data
    empty = LazyStrin
    ordertuple = ((Or,),(And
    andrea crotti, Jul 30, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. MaxTheMouse Guest

    On Jul 30, 7:27 am, wrote:
    > I created py2c (http://code.google.com/p/py2c)- an open source Python to C/C++ translator!
    > py2c is looking for developers!
    > To join create a posting in the py2c-discuss Google Group or email me!
    > Thanks
    > PS:I hope this is the appropiate group for this message.


    Out of curiosity.
    What is the difference between this and Shedskin? Shedskin being a
    (restricted) python-to-C++ compiler. (http://code.google.com/p/
    shedskin/) Is the goal to be able to handle any python code or a
    subset?

    Cheers,
    Adam
    MaxTheMouse, Jul 30, 2012
    #3
  4. alex23 Guest

    On Jul 31, 2:42 am, MaxTheMouse <> wrote:
    > What is the difference between this and Shedskin? Shedskin being a
    > (restricted) python-to-C++ compiler. (http://code.google.com/p/
    > shedskin/) Is the goal to be able to handle any python code or a
    > subset?


    There's also Nuitka, which is an unrestricted compiler, I believe:
    http://nuitka.net/pages/overview.html

    Is this a completely independent project, or are there plans to
    leverage off of PyPy's toolchain, for example?
    alex23, Jul 31, 2012
    #4
  5. alex23, 31.07.2012 02:16:
    > On Jul 31, 2:42 am, MaxTheMouse wrote:
    >> What is the difference between this and Shedskin? Shedskin being a
    >> (restricted) python-to-C++ compiler. (http://code.google.com/p/
    >> shedskin/) Is the goal to be able to handle any python code or a
    >> subset?

    >
    > There's also Nuitka, which is an unrestricted compiler, I believe:
    > http://nuitka.net/pages/overview.html


    Not to forget Cython, which is the only Python-to-C compiler that is in
    widespread use.


    > Is this a completely independent project, or are there plans to
    > leverage off of PyPy's toolchain, for example?


    >From a look at the source code, it seems hard to bring it together with

    anything. It looks very monolithic.

    Stefan
    Stefan Behnel, Jul 31, 2012
    #5
  6. Stefan Behnel, 31.07.2012 07:23:
    > From a look at the source code, it seems hard to bring it together with
    > anything. It looks very monolithic.


    Hmm, sorry, I mixed it up with "2c.py", which is yet another of those
    Python-to-C compilers with an all too similar name.

    https://code.google.com/p/2c-python/

    There are a couple of others here:

    http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonImplementations

    Seeing the number of those compilers, almost none of which is commonly used
    and/or still alive as a project, the question really is: why another one?

    I mean, it's totally fine as a hobby educational project, sure, and I
    really don't want to discourage anyone from going through this to have fun.

    But apart from "just for fun", what is the goal that would make this
    particular compiler different from the others? And also different enough to
    merit its own source base, instead of basing it on one of the existing
    projects? I don't consider "source is harder to read than to write" a good
    answer to this in general.

    Stefan
    Stefan Behnel, Jul 31, 2012
    #6
  7. On Tuesday, 31 July 2012 18:16:27 UTC+5:30, Stefan Behnel wrote:
    > Stefan Behnel, 31.07.2012 07:23:
    >
    > > From a look at the source code, it seems hard to bring it together with

    >
    > > anything. It looks very monolithic.

    >
    >
    >
    > Hmm, sorry, I mixed it up with "2c.py", which is yet another of those
    >
    > Python-to-C compilers with an all too similar name.
    >
    >
    >
    > https://code.google.com/p/2c-python/
    >
    >
    >
    > There are a couple of others here:
    >
    >
    >
    > http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonImplementations
    >
    >
    >
    > Seeing the number of those compilers, almost none of which is commonly used
    >
    > and/or still alive as a project, the question really is: why another one?
    >
    >
    >
    > I mean, it's totally fine as a hobby educational project, sure, and I
    >
    > really don't want to discourage anyone from going through this to have fun.
    >
    >
    >
    > But apart from "just for fun", what is the goal that would make this
    >
    > particular compiler different from the others? And also different enough to
    >
    > merit its own source base, instead of basing it on one of the existing
    >
    > projects? I don't consider "source is harder to read than to write" a good
    >
    > answer to this in general.


    >
    >
    > Stefan


    It converts to *pure* C/C++ *without* using Python or its API so that it can be the same speed as C/C++
    Ramchandra Apte, Sep 2, 2012
    #7
  8. On Tuesday, 31 July 2012 18:16:27 UTC+5:30, Stefan Behnel wrote:
    > Stefan Behnel, 31.07.2012 07:23:
    >
    > > From a look at the source code, it seems hard to bring it together with

    >
    > > anything. It looks very monolithic.

    >
    >
    >
    > Hmm, sorry, I mixed it up with "2c.py", which is yet another of those
    >
    > Python-to-C compilers with an all too similar name.
    >
    >
    >
    > https://code.google.com/p/2c-python/
    >
    >
    >
    > There are a couple of others here:
    >
    >
    >
    > http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonImplementations
    >
    >
    >
    > Seeing the number of those compilers, almost none of which is commonly used
    >
    > and/or still alive as a project, the question really is: why another one?
    >
    >
    >
    > I mean, it's totally fine as a hobby educational project, sure, and I
    >
    > really don't want to discourage anyone from going through this to have fun.
    >
    >
    >
    > But apart from "just for fun", what is the goal that would make this
    >
    > particular compiler different from the others? And also different enough to
    >
    > merit its own source base, instead of basing it on one of the existing
    >
    > projects? I don't consider "source is harder to read than to write" a good
    >
    > answer to this in general.


    >
    >
    > Stefan


    It converts to *pure* C/C++ *without* using Python or its API so that it can be the same speed as C/C++
    Ramchandra Apte, Sep 2, 2012
    #8
  9. On 09/01/2012 09:15 PM, Ramchandra Apte wrote:
    > It converts to *pure* C/C++ *without* using Python or its API so that it can be the same speed as C/C++


    Sounds like a fun project for you. I hope you learn a lot doing it.
    That's reason enough for it. Do you plan to port all the standard
    python modules as well, though? Because Python modules, both in the
    standard library and third-party, are the main reasons that I use
    python. For example, PyGTK. Python is a great glue language. Since it
    can seamlessly interact with C and be extended in C, speed has never
    really been an issue for me.
    Michael Torrie, Sep 2, 2012
    #9
  10. >That's reason enough for it. Do you plan to port all the standard
    python modules as well, though?

    Well, it should be quite easy because most of the _modules are either C accelerator (which there is no need to port) or a C wrapper (which should be trivial to port)
    Ramchandra Apte, Sep 2, 2012
    #10
  11. >That's reason enough for it. Do you plan to port all the standard
    python modules as well, though?

    Well, it should be quite easy because most of the _modules are either C accelerator (which there is no need to port) or a C wrapper (which should be trivial to port)
    Ramchandra Apte, Sep 2, 2012
    #11
  12. On Sunday, 2 September 2012 11:18:38 UTC+5:30, Michael Torrie wrote:
    > On 09/01/2012 09:15 PM, Ramchandra Apte wrote:
    >
    > > It converts to *pure* C/C++ *without* using Python or its API so that it can be the same speed as C/C++

    >
    >
    >
    > Sounds like a fun project for you. I hope you learn a lot doing it.
    >
    > That's reason enough for it. Do you plan to port all the standard
    >
    > python modules as well, though? Because Python modules, both in the
    >
    > standard library and third-party, are the main reasons that I use
    >
    > python. For example, PyGTK. Python is a great glue language. Since it
    >
    > can seamlessly interact with C and be extended in C, speed has never
    >
    > really been an issue for me.


    I am writing py2c for my OS written in Python (planned) .
    >Sounds like a fun project for you.

    More fun with more developers. (I need developers)
    Ramchandra Apte, Sep 2, 2012
    #12
  13. On Sunday, 2 September 2012 11:18:38 UTC+5:30, Michael Torrie wrote:
    > On 09/01/2012 09:15 PM, Ramchandra Apte wrote:
    >
    > > It converts to *pure* C/C++ *without* using Python or its API so that it can be the same speed as C/C++

    >
    >
    >
    > Sounds like a fun project for you. I hope you learn a lot doing it.
    >
    > That's reason enough for it. Do you plan to port all the standard
    >
    > python modules as well, though? Because Python modules, both in the
    >
    > standard library and third-party, are the main reasons that I use
    >
    > python. For example, PyGTK. Python is a great glue language. Since it
    >
    > can seamlessly interact with C and be extended in C, speed has never
    >
    > really been an issue for me.


    I am writing py2c for my OS written in Python (planned) .
    >Sounds like a fun project for you.

    More fun with more developers. (I need developers)
    Ramchandra Apte, Sep 2, 2012
    #13
  14. Ramchandra Apte, 02.09.2012 08:10:
    >> That's reason enough for it. Do you plan to port all the standard

    > python modules as well, though?
    >
    > Well, it should be quite easy because most of the _modules are either C accelerator (which there is no need to port) or a C wrapper (which should be trivial to port)


    Nope, not at all. They use the CPython C-API internally, so in order to
    port them, you'll have to reimplement that first. That's a huge amount of
    work, as proven by the incompleteness of all other Python implementations
    in that regard. If you think you can do better here then IronPython or
    PyPy, please go ahead.

    Stefan
    Stefan Behnel, Sep 2, 2012
    #14
  15. On 02.09.12 06:15, Ramchandra Apte wrote:
    > It converts to *pure* C/C++ *without* using Python or its API so that it can be the same speed as C/C++


    How is it implemented long integers?
    Serhiy Storchaka, Sep 2, 2012
    #15
  16. On 02/09/2012 07:16, Ramchandra Apte wrote:
    > On Sunday, 2 September 2012 11:18:38 UTC+5:30, Michael Torrie wrote:
    >> On 09/01/2012 09:15 PM, Ramchandra Apte wrote:
    >>
    >>> It converts to *pure* C/C++ *without* using Python or its API so that it can be the same speed as C/C++

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Sounds like a fun project for you. I hope you learn a lot doing it.
    >>
    >> That's reason enough for it. Do you plan to port all the standard
    >>
    >> python modules as well, though? Because Python modules, both in the
    >>
    >> standard library and third-party, are the main reasons that I use
    >>
    >> python. For example, PyGTK. Python is a great glue language. Since it
    >>
    >> can seamlessly interact with C and be extended in C, speed has never
    >>
    >> really been an issue for me.

    >
    > I am writing py2c for my OS written in Python (planned) .
    >> Sounds like a fun project for you.

    > More fun with more developers. (I need developers)
    >


    Your earlier quote "Well, it should be quite easy because most of the
    _modules are either C accelerator (which there is no need to port) or a
    C wrapper (which should be trivial to port)" means that I won't be
    touching the project with a 10 foot long disinfected barge pole.

    --
    Cheers.

    Mark Lawrence.
    Mark Lawrence, Sep 2, 2012
    #16
  17. On Sunday, 2 September 2012 12:53:35 UTC+5:30, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
    > On 02.09.12 06:15, Ramchandra Apte wrote:
    >
    > > It converts to *pure* C/C++ *without* using Python or its API so that it can be the same speed as C/C++

    >
    >
    >
    > How is it implemented long integers?


    py2c has been just started (long integer multiplacation might use the Python internal multiplication code) (it uses the karatsuba algorithm)
    Ramchandra Apte, Sep 2, 2012
    #17
  18. On Sunday, 2 September 2012 12:53:35 UTC+5:30, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
    > On 02.09.12 06:15, Ramchandra Apte wrote:
    >
    > > It converts to *pure* C/C++ *without* using Python or its API so that it can be the same speed as C/C++

    >
    >
    >
    > How is it implemented long integers?


    py2c has been just started (long integer multiplacation might use the Python internal multiplication code) (it uses the karatsuba algorithm)
    Ramchandra Apte, Sep 2, 2012
    #18
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    315
  2. Neo
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    441
  3. pat eyler
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    430
    Masayoshi Takahashi
    Mar 5, 2005
  4. fabus
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    84
    fabus
    Jun 5, 2008
  5. fabus
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    113
    fabus
    Jun 17, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page