Hi Tom, On Mo, 2014-03-03 at 10:10 -0600, Tom Browder wrote: > Jumping in here late for a question with no info on this project: any > use of or thought of using SWIG?
SWIG would likely also work, but at this stage we have already a functioning wrapper using ctpyes/ctypesgen, on linux at least it works well. On windows it needs some more work to have it working, I wonder if that would be different using SWIG ? >From my perspective it's not very important if it's SWIG or ctypes, but I mostly write code on _top_ of that binding, so Bryan could have some more strong opinion on this ? I did consider that it could perhaps make sense to include the python bindings in BRL-CAD code, and leave only the python wrapper classes for a python-brlcad extra package. That would simplify a few things, and make sure the same environment compiles the python bindings as the core BRL-CAD. Not sure if SWIG or ctypes is the way to go - Bryan, what do you think about all this ? >From my point of view the end result is important - I want to be able to script BRL-CAD geometry using python. Cheers, Csaba ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subversion Kills Productivity. Get off Subversion & Make the Move to Perforce. With Perforce, you get hassle-free workflows. Merge that actually works. Faster operations. Version large binaries. Built-in WAN optimization and the freedom to use Git, Perforce or both. Make the move to Perforce. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=122218951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ BRL-CAD Developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/brlcad-devel
