In my niche corner of scientific computing it feels like Cython has largely been replaced by Numba and CFFI, or just Julia. Last I checked it still needed setup.py which is a bit of a deal breaker in 2025.
ADadsharma10月6日
A more interesting path is to keep dbscan_inner in pure python with type annotations and then use
py2many --mojo=1 dbscan_inner.py
to translate.
RORossBencina10月7日
Very interesting. I'm currently trading off whether to use Mojo or C++/pybind to accelerate simulations that combine matrix operations with fine-grained scalar calculations. I only recently learned that pybind + cppimport offers the integrated compile-on-import experience available in Mojo.
PJpjmlp10月7日
> I think moving a lot of scikit-learn’s more computationally intensive code to Mojo could be an interesting project.
Only if you want to lose access to Windows users, as it is a low priority for Mojo development.
JOjononor10月8日
Mojo is not open source, so how can it be realistic to use it in scikit-learn?
We spent decades getting out of the clutches of Mathworks, Microsoft, etc. Why are people eager to go back that way?
评论
5 条预览评论 · 正在加载完整讨论请先登录 h4cker 账号，然后连接 Hacker News 后发表评论。
In my niche corner of scientific computing it feels like Cython has largely been replaced by Numba and CFFI, or just Julia. Last I checked it still needed setup.py which is a bit of a deal breaker in 2025.
A more interesting path is to keep dbscan_inner in pure python with type annotations and then use py2many --mojo=1 dbscan_inner.py to translate.
Very interesting. I'm currently trading off whether to use Mojo or C++/pybind to accelerate simulations that combine matrix operations with fine-grained scalar calculations. I only recently learned that pybind + cppimport offers the integrated compile-on-import experience available in Mojo.
> I think moving a lot of scikit-learn’s more computationally intensive code to Mojo could be an interesting project. Only if you want to lose access to Windows users, as it is a low priority for Mojo development.
Mojo is not open source, so how can it be realistic to use it in scikit-learn? We spent decades getting out of the clutches of Mathworks, Microsoft, etc. Why are people eager to go back that way?