Python compiler

[Chris Barker]

Paul Prescod wrote:
> but I would say that if what you need is speed, the best solution
> is often to code in Python and then rewrite your inner loops in C.

That's what I do, but I have to say that I am very disappointed that I
have to. Now I have to know 2 languages (I'm not very good at C). What I
have found is that, as Paul suggests, you really only need that
"compiled" speed for a very small subset of your programs, but I end up
having to spent a week re-coding a small function in C that I wrote in a
couple of hours in Python (and I had the algorithm worked out already!)
If I was more experienced at C, it would be faster, but still a lot more
time. That's why I use Python in the first place. Personally, I'm
looking forward to the proposed "optionally static typing" for Py3k. If
this were combined with a revival of Py2C, I would probably never have
to write C again!

> Or even profile your Python and then optimize it. You'll be amazed how much
> speed you can squeeze out if you concentrate on your problem areas.

This works too (and use Numeric!) that's why I have only had to write a
handful of C functions in a couple of years of heavy Python use. That's
still a handful more that I would have liked.

-Chris


-- 
Christopher Barker,
Ph.D.                                                           
ChrisHBarker at home.net                 ---           ---           ---
http://members.home.net/barkerlohmann ---@@       -----@@       -----@@
                                   ------@@@     ------@@@     ------@@@
Oil Spill Modeling                ------   @    ------   @   ------   @
Water Resources Engineering       -------      ---------     --------    
Coastal and Fluvial Hydrodynamics --------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------