On Mar 31, 2016 6:40 AM, "Stefan Behnel" <stefan...@behnel.de> wrote: > > Jason Madden schrieb am 31.03.2016 um 15:13: > > On Thursday, 31 March 2016 00:50:57 UTC-5, Matthew Brett wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Forest Gregg <fgr...@gmail.com > >> <javascript:>> wrote: > >>> Thanks! > >>> > >>> Are there also plans to post Windows wheels for cython 0.23.5 to pypi > >> like > >>> there was for 0.23.4? > >> > >> I did that earlier today, using an Appveyor build system : > >> > >> https://github.com/MacPython/cython-wheels/blob/master/appveyor.yml > >> https://ci.appveyor.com/project/matthew-brett/cython-wheels > >> http://win-wheels.scikit-image.org/ > >> > >> Do they work for you? > > > > They work for building gevent on Appveyor. The cython binary wheels cut > > gevent's total build time by more than half (they save almost 10 minutes). > > That makes me wonder if we shouldn't just provide pure Python wheels of > Cython, i.e. without compiling any binary extensions in them. For one-time > installs, it would only be marginally slower than with a compiled Cython, > but it would work on all platforms with all Python versions. > > I guess the drawback would be that it would be more hassle for people who > really want to install Cython permanently for themselves... > > Is there a way to tag a wheel somehow as "special"? I doubt that > Nick&friends thought about the special Cython installation use case when > designing the format...
The general case is "library with optional native acceleration". I think one thing is that if there's both a generic and a specific wheel then pip will prefer the specific one? So an arch-specific wheel will get higher priority than a py2.py3-none-any wheel. Of course this only works if both are available -- it's more of a fallback thing. -n
_______________________________________________ cython-devel mailing list cython-devel@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
