[Pyrex] Should Pyrex be in standard Python?

[Bob Ippolito]

On Jan 21, 2004, at 10:33 PM, Paul Prescod wrote:

> Let me add a bit more hyperbole to my previous post.
>
> In my opinion, Pyrex has as much potential as Python.
>
> They are yin and yang. Interpreted and compiled. Dynamic/Static. 
> Inefficient/optimized. High-level and (relatively) low-level. But 
> that's too simplistic a way to look at it, because at one end of its 
> usage spectrum Pyrex IS basically Python.
>
> So Pyrex and Python are two halves OF THE SAME LANGUAGE. A single 
> language that spans damn-near the whole application development gamut. 
> It will take years for the languages to merge (if ever) but it seems 
> to me to be a logical end-goal. I should be able to start a program 
> and with no effort designate functions to be compiled instead of 
> interpreted.

I don't see it as two halves.. I mean, you have Jython, PyPy (well, 
theoretically), stackless, IronPython (theoretically).

Also, theoretically, you could compile Pyrex code to 
ctypes-using-Python-code (with an upgrade of ctypes)... that would be 
interesting.

-bob