nanobind VS Nuitka

Take a look at https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind

> More concretely, benchmarks show up to ~4× faster compile time, ~5× smaller binaries, and ~10× lower runtime overheads compared to pybind11.

People should not take that an endorsement of Swig.

Please use ctypes, cffi or https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind

Beazley himself is amazed that it (Swig) is still in use.

Nanobind made by the creator of PyBind11, it has a similar interface, but it takes leverage of C++17 and it aims to have more efficient bindings in space and speed.

I would recommend using NanoBind, the follow up of PyBind11 by the same author (Wensel Jakob), and move as much performance critical code to C or C++. https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind

If you really care about performance called from Python, consider something like NVIDIA Warp (Preview). Warp jits and runs your code on CUDA or CPU. Although Warp targets physics simulation, geometry processing, and procedural animation, it can be used for other tasks as well. https://github.com/NVIDIA/warp

Jax is another option, by Google, jitting and vectorizing code for TPU, GPU or CPU. https://github.com/google/jax

You can probably generate C code from Python now with Nuitka and pump that into this Cosmopolitan tool, today, to get that?

https://nuitka.net/

You could try Nuitka [1], but I don't have enough experience with it to say if it's any less brittle than PyInstaller.

[1]: https://nuitka.net/

Nuitka is actively maintained and support for 2.6 and 2.7. It is the work of a single guy, and I have never used it, so I don't know much about it.

https://nuitka.net/

Thanks for the feedback! I'm Syrus, main author of the work on py2wasm.

We already opened a PR into Nuitka to bring the relevant changes upstream: https://github.com/Nuitka/Nuitka/pull/2814

We envision py2wasm being a thin layer on top of Nuitka, as also commented in the article.

From what we gathered, we believe that there's usefulness on having py2wasm as a separate package, as py2wasm would also need to ship the precompiled Python distribution (3.11) for WASI (which will not be needed for the other Nuitka use cases), apart of also shipping other tools that are not directly relevant for Nuitka

This is a good place to mention https://nuitka.net/ which aims to compile python programs into standalone binaries.

For Python, you could make a proper deployment binary using Nuitka (in standalone mode – avoid onefile mode for this). I'm not pretending it's as easy as building a Go executable: you may have to do some manual hacking for more unusual unusual packages, and I don't think you can cross compile. I think a key element you're getting at is that Go executables have very few dependencies on OS packages, but with Python (once you've sorted the actual Python dependencies) you only need the packages used for manylinux [2], which is not too onerous.

[1] https://nuitka.net/

[2] https://peps.python.org/pep-0599/#the-manylinux2014-policy