In most cases, carefully examine why you need native code at all. Since
a good number of performance sensitive CPython modules are in fact
written in C to begin with, the improvements may not always be
significant.
I don't know about your application but here are some general
observations. Beginer
> Learning to use Psyco is very easy, for a basic usage you just have to
> put in your code:
> import psyco
> psyco.full()
>
> For a better usage you can do:
> psyco.bind(functioname)
> for just the functions that you have seen can enjoy the compilation.
>
> For a smart usage you can learn few tric
On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 23:59:34 +0300, Lawrence Oluyede <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I don't know what you heard but IronPython generates IL code which
> happens to be the bytecode of the CLR (the runtime of .NET). So you are
> not generating "native" stuff but a PE executable wrapping the .NET
> st
dtlog:
> So the question is, should I switch to IronPython and compile
> my scripts, or learn to use something like pyinline or Psyco?
Learning to use Psyco is very easy, for a basic usage you just have to
put in your code:
import psyco
psyco.full()
For a better usage you can do:
psyco.bind(funct
dtlog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I searched the faqs at python.org and didn't find an answer:
> does using IronPython, instead of CPython, and compiling the
> scripts into native windows executables (I heard IronPython
> can do that) result in faster execution times?
I don't know what you heard
Hello, and sorry if this has been asked before...
I searched the faqs at python.org and didn't find an answer:
does using IronPython, instead of CPython, and compiling the
scripts into native windows executables (I heard IronPython
can do that) result in faster execution times? Or is it just
a matt
