On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn <d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no> wrote: > This seems similar to Carl Witty's port of Cython to .NET/IronPython. An > important insight from that project is that Cython code does NOT specify an > ABI, only an API which requires a C compiler to make sense. That is; many > wrapped C libraries have plenty of macros, we only require partial > definition of struct, we only require approximate typedef's, and so on. > > In the .NET port, the consequence was that rather than the original idea of > generating C# code (with FFI specifications) was dropped, and one instead > went with C++/CLR (which is a proper C++ compiler that really understands > the C side on an API level, in addition to giving access to the .NET > runtime).
Let me just add that a way to deal with the API vs. ABI issue would be useful for other potential Cython targets as well, such as IronPython using C# and Jython. (A C# port for IronPython would be more valuable than my C++/CLI port because it would work under Mono -- Mono doesn't have a C++/CLI compiler and probably never will.) Carl _______________________________________________ cython-devel mailing list cython-devel@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
