On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:19 AM, mark florisson
>> wrote:
>>> On 21 February 2012 04:42, Robert Bradshaw
>>> wrote:
Python bytecode -> LLVM is a great idea for creating
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:19 AM, mark florisson
> wrote:
>> On 21 February 2012 04:42, Robert Bradshaw
>> wrote:
>>> Python bytecode -> LLVM is a great idea for creating ufuncs, the
>>> overhead of Cython + GCC is atrocious for stuff lik
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:19 AM, mark florisson
wrote:
> On 21 February 2012 04:42, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> Python bytecode -> LLVM is a great idea for creating ufuncs, the
>> overhead of Cython + GCC is atrocious for stuff like this. (I think
>> Cython could make a good frontent as well, es
On 21 February 2012 04:42, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> Python bytecode -> LLVM is a great idea for creating ufuncs, the
> overhead of Cython + GCC is atrocious for stuff like this. (I think
> Cython could make a good frontent as well, especially if we generated
> just the .c code for the function rat
Python bytecode -> LLVM is a great idea for creating ufuncs, the
overhead of Cython + GCC is atrocious for stuff like this. (I think
Cython could make a good frontent as well, especially if we generated
just the .c code for the function rather than a full extension module
and used a good compiler t
This has got to be the most incredible and interesting turn of events
I've seen in a while! :-)
Dag
Original Message
Subject:Re: [Numpy-discussion] Proposed Roadmap Overview
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 22:04:00 -0600
From: Travis Oliphant
Reply-To: Discussion of
