RE: Re: Python parser

Charles Hixson wrote:

> What about instead defining a method that would allow one to 
> link in C 
> code?  And, more to the point, C libraries?  These would be libraries 
> that had been compiled in the normal way for whatever system 
> you are on, 
> and you could count on the header files being available to 
> specify what 
> pieces were needed.
> 
> I realize that this is, itself, a non-trivial problem, but it would 
> immediately make available a large number of libraries, and 
> would also 
> allow people to optimize small parts of their code.  So it 
> would have an 
> immense number of advantages...and you MIGHT be able to do it in a 
> rather portable way...(it might be that only a small amount of code 
> would need to change from OS to OS...or compiler to compiler).

I proposed this a short while ago on the Prothon mailing list as an
alternative to having C extensions and Greg Ewing of Pyrex fame shot a big
hole in the idea.  I can't remember what the flaw was at this moment but it
was a biggie.  I could look it up in the archives.