On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Geoffrey Irving <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm revamping Otherlab's use of petsc, and taking another look at
> petsc4py as part of that. Previously we rolled our own Python
> bindings, but it'd be great to not have to do that.
>
> However, our usage would involve writing new C/C++ functions which
> take petsc types as arguments, and then exposing these new functions
> to python. Is there a way to do this if the petsc4py bindings are
> written in Cython?
1) Lisandro is the expert
2) C is fairly trivial using Cython
3) If you use a bunch of C++ stuff, at least when I evaluated things last
time,
Cython was fairly hard to manage (esp. templates). However, SWIG
worked alright. I have never tried mixing SWIG and Cython, but I would
think its possible, since all you have to do is pull out a wrapped
pointer.
I have never seen mixed language programming be more efficient for a
developing library. Wrapping stable, debugged libraries makes a lot of
sense,
and can really speed up development. Wrapping libraries you are still
playing
with makes interfaces changes harder, and debugging a nightmare.
Matt
>
> Geoffrey
>
--
What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their
experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their
experiments lead.
-- Norbert Wiener
