[sqlalchemy] c-extensions have to be explicitly requested?!

2010-07-08 Thread Chris Withers
Hi All, I'm a bit surprised to find that you have to ask for the new C extensions in 0.6 to be explicitly compiled. It also appears that the way of requesting this isn't compatible with build tools like a pip requirements file or buildout. What was the reason for that? If it was purely in

Re: [sqlalchemy] c-extensions have to be explicitly requested?!

2010-07-08 Thread Michael Bayer
On Jul 8, 2010, at 6:30 AM, Chris Withers wrote: Hi All, I'm a bit surprised to find that you have to ask for the new C extensions in 0.6 to be explicitly compiled. It also appears that the way of requesting this isn't compatible with build tools like a pip requirements file or

Re: [sqlalchemy] c-extensions have to be explicitly requested?!

2010-07-08 Thread Chris Withers
Michael Bayer wrote: http://svn.zope.org/zope.interface/trunk/setup.py?view=auto we wanted to annoy buildout/setuptools/Glyph as much as possible, and I am happy to say we succeeded. I hope you're joking :-S The issue of them not building by default wasn't that they might not build, just

Re: [sqlalchemy] c-extensions have to be explicitly requested?!

2010-07-08 Thread Michael Bayer
On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Chris Withers wrote: Michael Bayer wrote: http://svn.zope.org/zope.interface/trunk/setup.py?view=auto we wanted to annoy buildout/setuptools/Glyph as much as possible, and I am happy to say we succeeded. I hope you're joking :-S The issue of them not

Re: [sqlalchemy] c-extensions have to be explicitly requested?!

2010-07-08 Thread Chris Withers
Michael Bayer wrote: Not sure if we'd want to change this default midway through 0.6 or wait til 0.7. Fair enough, but this is sadly one of those things where you're only likely to find the edge cases when you do make it on by default... The C exts also don't improve performance that much