How I Replaced Python with C in My Project
For years, I had been using Python as my go-to language for most projects. Its simplicity, vast ecosystem, and rapid development capabilities made it an obvious choice. However, as my latest project grew in complexity and scale, I began hitting performance bottlenecks that Python couldn't overcome. That's when I made the difficult decision to rewrite critical components in C. The Project: A High-Performance Data Processor My project was a data processing pipeline that needed to: Handle millions of data points per second Perform complex mathematical transformations Maintain low latency for real-time applications Run efficiently on resource-constrained hardware While Python with NumPy worked fine initially, as our data volumes grew by 10x, we started seeing: Memory usage spikes CPU bottlenecks Unpredictable garbage collection pauses Difficulty integrating with some hardware accelerators Why C? After benchmarking and profiling, it became clear that for our core processing logic, we needed: Predictable performance Direct memory control Minimal runtime overhead Better hardware integration C offered all these benefits, though at the cost of development velocity and safety nets that Python provides. The Rewrite Process Phase 1: Identifying Hotspots I used Python's cProfile to identify the most time-consuming functions. The top candidates for rewriting were: Matrix transformation algorithms Custom statistical calculations Data serialization/deserialization Low-level device communication Phase 2: Creating C Extensions for Python Instead of a full rewrite, I first tried creating C extensions using Python's C API: #include static PyObject* fast_transform(PyObject* self, PyObject* args) { // Parse Python arguments PyObject* input_list; if (!PyArg_ParseTuple(args, "O", &input_list)) { return NULL; } // Convert Python list to C array Py_ssize_t length = PyList_Size(input_list); double* values = malloc(length * sizeof(double)); for (Py_ssize_t i = 0; i < length; i++) { values[i] = PyFloat_AsDouble(PyList_GetItem(input_list, i)); } // Perform computation for (Py_ssize_t i = 0; i < length; i++) { values[i] = transform_value(values[i]); } // Convert back to Python list PyObject* result = PyList_New(length); for (Py_ssize_t i = 0; i < length; i++) { PyList_SetItem(result, i, PyFloat_FromDouble(values[i])); } free(values); return result; } static PyMethodDef module_methods[] = { {"fast_transform", fast_transform, METH_VARARGS, "Perform fast transformation"}, {NULL, NULL, 0, NULL} }; PyMODINIT_FUNC PyInit_fastmod(void) { return PyModule_Create(&fastmod); } This hybrid approach gave us a 5-8x speedup in the critical functions while keeping most of the system in Python. Phase 3: Full Rewrite of Core Components For components where even the C extension approach wasn't sufficient, we went for a full rewrite: Data Processing Engine: Rewrote the core pipeline in C with careful memory management Network Layer: Implemented a custom protocol handler in C for lower latency Hardware Integration: Created direct hardware communication bypassing Python entirely Challenges Faced 1. Memory Management Going from Python's garbage collection to manual memory management was painful: // Example of careful memory management void process_data(DataPacket* packet) { Buffer* buf = create_buffer(packet->size); if (!buf) { handle_error(); return; } if (transform_data(packet, buf) != SUCCESS) { free_buffer(buf); // Must clean up on all exit paths handle_error(); return; } // ... more processing ... free_buffer(buf); } Solution: Adopted a consistent ownership model and used static analyzers to catch leaks. 2. Error Handling Python's exceptions vs. C's error codes required careful adaptation: typedef enum { ERR_NONE = 0, ERR_INVALID_INPUT, ERR_MEMORY, ERR_IO, // ... } ErrorCode; ErrorCode process_file(const char* filename, Result** out_result) { *out_result = NULL; FILE* fp = fopen(filename, "rb"); if (!fp) return ERR_IO; ErrorCode err = ERR_NONE; Result* result = malloc(sizeof(Result)); if (!result) { err = ERR_MEMORY; goto cleanup; } // ... processing ... *out_result = result; cleanup: if (err != ERR_NONE && result) free(result); if (fp) fclose(fp); return err; } 3. Development Velocity The edit-compile-test cycle was much slower. We mitigated this by: Maintaining thorough test suites Using better tooling (CLion, custom build scripts) Keeping Python wrappers for rapid prototyping Key Lessons Learned Not All Code Needs Rewriting: Only performance-critical paths benefit from C Hybrid Approaches Work: Python for glue code, C for heavy lifting Tooling Matters: Good debuggers (GDB,

For years, I had been using Python as my go-to language for most projects. Its simplicity, vast ecosystem, and rapid development capabilities made it an obvious choice. However, as my latest project grew in complexity and scale, I began hitting performance bottlenecks that Python couldn't overcome. That's when I made the difficult decision to rewrite critical components in C.
The Project: A High-Performance Data Processor
- My project was a data processing pipeline that needed to:
- Handle millions of data points per second
- Perform complex mathematical transformations
- Maintain low latency for real-time applications
- Run efficiently on resource-constrained hardware
While Python with NumPy worked fine initially, as our data volumes grew by 10x, we started seeing:
- Memory usage spikes
- CPU bottlenecks
- Unpredictable garbage collection pauses
- Difficulty integrating with some hardware accelerators
Why C?
After benchmarking and profiling, it became clear that for our core processing logic, we needed:
- Predictable performance
- Direct memory control
- Minimal runtime overhead
- Better hardware integration
C offered all these benefits, though at the cost of development velocity and safety nets that Python provides.
The Rewrite Process
Phase 1: Identifying Hotspots
I used Python's cProfile to identify the most time-consuming functions. The top candidates for rewriting were:
- Matrix transformation algorithms
- Custom statistical calculations
- Data serialization/deserialization
- Low-level device communication
Phase 2: Creating C Extensions for Python
Instead of a full rewrite, I first tried creating C extensions using Python's C API:
#include
static PyObject* fast_transform(PyObject* self, PyObject* args) {
// Parse Python arguments
PyObject* input_list;
if (!PyArg_ParseTuple(args, "O", &input_list)) {
return NULL;
}
// Convert Python list to C array
Py_ssize_t length = PyList_Size(input_list);
double* values = malloc(length * sizeof(double));
for (Py_ssize_t i = 0; i < length; i++) {
values[i] = PyFloat_AsDouble(PyList_GetItem(input_list, i));
}
// Perform computation
for (Py_ssize_t i = 0; i < length; i++) {
values[i] = transform_value(values[i]);
}
// Convert back to Python list
PyObject* result = PyList_New(length);
for (Py_ssize_t i = 0; i < length; i++) {
PyList_SetItem(result, i, PyFloat_FromDouble(values[i]));
}
free(values);
return result;
}
static PyMethodDef module_methods[] = {
{"fast_transform", fast_transform, METH_VARARGS, "Perform fast transformation"},
{NULL, NULL, 0, NULL}
};
PyMODINIT_FUNC PyInit_fastmod(void) {
return PyModule_Create(&fastmod);
}
This hybrid approach gave us a 5-8x speedup in the critical functions while keeping most of the system in Python.
Phase 3: Full Rewrite of Core Components
For components where even the C extension approach wasn't sufficient, we went for a full rewrite:
Data Processing Engine: Rewrote the core pipeline in C with careful memory management
Network Layer: Implemented a custom protocol handler in C for lower latency
Hardware Integration: Created direct hardware communication bypassing Python entirely
Challenges Faced
1. Memory Management
Going from Python's garbage collection to manual memory management was painful:
// Example of careful memory management
void process_data(DataPacket* packet) {
Buffer* buf = create_buffer(packet->size);
if (!buf) {
handle_error();
return;
}
if (transform_data(packet, buf) != SUCCESS) {
free_buffer(buf); // Must clean up on all exit paths
handle_error();
return;
}
// ... more processing ...
free_buffer(buf);
}
Solution: Adopted a consistent ownership model and used static analyzers to catch leaks.
2. Error Handling
Python's exceptions vs. C's error codes required careful adaptation:
typedef enum {
ERR_NONE = 0,
ERR_INVALID_INPUT,
ERR_MEMORY,
ERR_IO,
// ...
} ErrorCode;
ErrorCode process_file(const char* filename, Result** out_result) {
*out_result = NULL;
FILE* fp = fopen(filename, "rb");
if (!fp) return ERR_IO;
ErrorCode err = ERR_NONE;
Result* result = malloc(sizeof(Result));
if (!result) {
err = ERR_MEMORY;
goto cleanup;
}
// ... processing ...
*out_result = result;
cleanup:
if (err != ERR_NONE && result) free(result);
if (fp) fclose(fp);
return err;
}
3. Development Velocity
The edit-compile-test cycle was much slower. We mitigated this by:
Maintaining thorough test suites
Using better tooling (CLion, custom build scripts)
Keeping Python wrappers for rapid prototyping
Key Lessons Learned
Not All Code Needs Rewriting: Only performance-critical paths benefit from C
Hybrid Approaches Work: Python for glue code, C for heavy lifting
Tooling Matters: Good debuggers (GDB, LLDB) and sanitizers are essential
Testing is Crucial: More bugs surface in C, so need better tests
Document Assumptions: C requires more explicit contracts about memory, threading, etc.
Current Architecture
Our system now looks like:
Python Frontend] <-IPC-> [C Core Engine] <-Direct-> [Hardware]
- Python handles UI, configuration, and high-level logic
- C handles all performance-sensitive operations
- Well-defined interfaces between components
Conclusion
Replacing Python with C was a significant undertaking, but for our performance-critical application, the benefits were undeniable. We achieved:
- Order-of-magnitude performance improvements
- More predictable behavior under load
- Better hardware integration
- Reduced resource requirements
That said, I wouldn't recommend this approach for every project. The tradeoffs in development speed, safety, and maintainability are substantial. But when you truly need maximum performance and control, C remains an excellent choice even in 2023.
Would I do it again? For the right project - absolutely. But next time, I might consider Rust as a middle ground between Python's safety and C's performance!
Resources That Helped
"Python/C API Reference Manual" - Official documentation
"Effective C" by Robert Seacord - Modern C best practices
"The Art of Writing Shared Libraries" by Ulrich Drepper - For performance tuning
Clang sanitizers - For catching memory issues
Cython - Useful for transitional phases
Have you undertaken a similar migration? I'd love to hear about your experiences in the comments!
Thank you for reading this blog post. If you wanna read such more. Check out my website.