On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Brett Calcott <[email protected]> wrote:
> I may be guilty of thinking of cython as a "code-generator" :( Well, aren't all compilers :). There's a distinction between code generators and wrapper generators (which you seem to understand). Of course automatically generating .pxd files for use from Cython is a slightly different thing that would be very handy to have. > On 5 November 2010 08:28, Stefan Behnel <[email protected]> wrote: >> Christopher Barker, 04.11.2010 17:55: >>> One day, we may have a mature Cython code generator for wrapping C/C++ >>> (and it may be worth looking at what has been done along those lines). >> >> The code generation has never been the main problem. That would be parsing >> arbitrary header files (preferably without adding huge dependencies like >> gccxml or clang) and figuring out what's relevant enough to merit ending up >> in the generated code. Once that's done, generating a Cython .pxd file >> and/or "mostly usable" code skeleton from it is rather straight forward. >> > > Getting the pxd files automated would be nice. But I *like* > constructing the pyx files by hand, as I don't want to simply copy the > c/c++ interface (like swig does). It means you can rethink how the > structure of a library best works in a python-like way. Yes, I think this is extremely valuable too. > The problem > I'm having (which I'm getting solutions too - thanks!) is that a large > proportion of python code ends up being dumb property mapping stuff. Yeah. I don't think we've hit on a nice Pythonic way to do this yet, but I agree it could be better. If there's a lot, I might be tempted to write a one-off script generating this portion of the file--as mentioned, much easier than getting the general case right. > In any case, thanks for listening, and the suggestions. I hope to be > hanging around for a while. Good. - Robert _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
