On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 2:24 AM, Heikki Toivonen <htoivo...@spikesource.com> wrote: > David Cournapeau wrote: >> The hard (or rather time consuming) work is to do everything else that >> distutils does related to the packaging. That's where scons/waf are >> more interesting than cmake IMO, because you can "easily" give up this >> task back to distutils, whereas it is inherently more difficult with >> cmake. > > I think this was the first I heard about using SCons this way. Do you > have any articles or examples of this? If not, could you perhaps write one?
I developed numscons as an experiment to build numpy, scipy, and other complex python projects depending on many library/compilers: http://github.com/cournape/numscons/tree/master The general ideas are somewhat explained on my blog http://cournape.wordpress.com/?s=numscons And also the slides from SciPy08 conf: http://conference.scipy.org/static/wiki/numscons.pdf It is plugged into distutils through a scons command (which bypasses all the compiled build_* ones, so that the whole build is done through scons for correct dependency handling). It is not really meant as a general replacement (it is too fragile, partly because of distutils, partly because of scons, partly because of me), but it shows it is possible not only theoretically. cheers, David _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
