[PRE REVIEW]: Pyccel: a Python-to-X transpiler for scientific high-performance computing

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @yguclu (Yaman Güçlü)
Repository: https://github.com/pyccel/pyccel/
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss-paper
Version: v1.7.0
Editor: @danielskatz
Reviewers: @aholmes, @IgorBaratta, @boegel
Managing EiC: Daniel S. Katz

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/8b565b8f36e1d0cccb3c749ff22857e3"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/8b565b8f36e1d0cccb3c749ff22857e3/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/8b565b8f36e1d0cccb3c749ff22857e3/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/8b565b8f36e1d0cccb3c749ff22857e3)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @yguclu. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@yguclu if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=1.05 s (729.2 files/s, 91270.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                         616          15362          12849          52658
Markdown                        22           1089              0           3348
CMake                           31            495            567           1811
C                                6            170            273           1398
reStructuredText                56           1339           1230           1108
YAML                            19             82             70            761
C/C++ Header                     5             50            147            260
TeX                              2             23             26            209
Fortran 90                       2             99             30            186
DOS Batch                        2              8              1             43
INI                              1              0              0             11
TOML                             1              0              0             10
make                             1              4              6             10
Bourne Shell                     1              3             13              5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           765          18724          15212          61818
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1192

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1109/MCSE.2010.118 is OK
- 10.1088/1749-4680/8/1/014001 is OK
- 10.1145/1565824.1565827 is OK
- 10.1145/1238844.1238856 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ascom.2014.12.001 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[danielskatz]

👋 @yguclu - thanks for your submission. As the Track Editor, I'll soon be reviewing this briefly and then likely looking for an editor to find reviewers and run the review process.

[danielskatz]

@yguclu - On second thought, I will edit this.

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @danielskatz is now the editor

[danielskatz]

I would appreciate any suggestions for potential reviewers. Please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).

[aholmes]

I would appreciate any suggestions for potential reviewers. Please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).

Hello @danielskatz, I'm interested in reviewing.

[danielskatz]

Thanks @aholmes - I'll go ahead and add you in the system, but we won't actually start the review (in a new issue) until we get one or two more reviewers, so there's no action needed from you yet.

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot add @aholmes as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@aholmes added to the reviewers list!

[yguclu]

After a keyword search in this list of people I can suggest the following reviewers:

• jeremylt
• gassmoeller
• svchb
• victorapm
• kris-rowe

I do not know any of them personally, but I hope they can find our software of interest.

[yguclu]

I can also suggest these people as potential reviewers:

• ax3l
• pnavaro
• perazz

[danielskatz]

👋 @jeremylt & @gassmoeller - Would either of you be willing to review this JOSS submission?

[danielskatz]

@IgorBaratta - thanks for volunteering - I'll add you now, but will continue to look for a third reviewer, and won't start the review until then

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot add @IgorBaratta as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@IgorBaratta added to the reviewers list!

[boegel]

@danielskatz I'm interested in reviewing (first time for JOSS)

[danielskatz]

Thanks @boegel - I'll add you, and we'll start the review

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot add @boegel as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@boegel added to the reviewers list!

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #4991.