Re: Questions about your approach

Am Samstag, den 12.04.2008, 14:05 +1200 schrieb Greg Ewing:

> They're aimed at different problems, I think. Python2c seems
> to have been an attempt to compile pure Python code. Pyrex
> is for interfacing between Python and C, so it's competing
> more with the likes of SWIG and Boost Python. It happens
> to have much the same effect as python2c if you apply it to
> pure Python code, but that's pretty much accidental.
> 

Actually, it does compete with SWIG only "indirectly", or one could
probably say "design" level.

IMHO, compared to SWIG, Pyrex wrappers around C code have IMHO a
different felling:

-) SWIG bindings are mostly automatic bindings, you can provide type
conversion helpers, but that's it.
-) Pyrex bindings OTOH are manually written.

In effect this means that SWIG bindings often have a nonpythonic feeling
as they just provide access to the C API, and sometimes need a Python
layer on top to feel idomatic.

Pyrex bindings, are not forced to offer the same API, so can provide a
more pythonic experience.

Just my $0.02,

Andreas

_______________________________________________
Pyrex mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.copyleft.no/mailman/listinfo/pyrex

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBIAO6UHJdudm4KnO0RAsxAAKDp24AcBybCxGGNzG3e72Bgeg3pMQCfft0M
VC/sCV1VxPW9faFTYU+0xvo=
=x8C/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----