On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How come you decided to move away from SWIG? I was under the impression
that SWIG makes it easy to keep a port in sync with the original and doesn't
require "manual rewrites" in another language.
Hi Otis,
Several reasons:
- SWIG keeps changing and with every new release breaks PyLucene.
SWIG 1.3.29's breaking of PyLucene was the last straw.
- SWIG is mostly in the way because it doesn't understand Java's GC and
because it provides a runtime type system around the C++ objects it's
wrapping that is redundant with Java's.
- Over the past year, I've written a lot of C code against the Python C API
and I realized that the code generated by SWIG was needlessy thick
and rather suboptimal. SWIG generated about 2,000 lines of python and
60,000 lines of C++ from PyLucene's SWIG file.
I replaced this with 0 lines of Python and 20,000 lines of C++.
Simple object creation is three times faster.
- By writing the wrappers manually I have an easier time integrating the
Lucene API into Python, and an easier time making it more pythonic.
- The Java Lucene API is fairly stable, playing manual catch-up isn't that
bad. Now that all the macros and patterns are in place, I can write a new
or updated Java Lucene API wrapper as fast (or faster) as a SWIG wrapper
especially if the new API involves a new type combination.
Andi..
----- Original Message ----
From: Andi Vajda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 3:57:44 PM
Subject: [pylucene-dev] PyLucene no longer uses SWIG
As of release 2.0, on the PyLucene development trunk, SWIG is no longer used.
Instead, the Python object wrappers are implemented by hand using the Python C
type system.
I uploaded a new PyLucene 2.0rc1-1 source tarball to:
http://downloads.osafoundation.org/PyLucene/src/PyLucene-src-2.0rc1-1.tar.gz
The handwritten wrappers represent about 20,000 lines of C++ code, a lot of
boilerplate. Although macros are heavily used, the rather repetitive nature of
this code makes it easy to make copy/paste mistakes along the way.
All PyLucene unit tests and samples are passing but I expect typos and
mistakes to still be lurking. If you find something wrong, it'll most likely
crash or report an InvalidArgsError that should be trivial to fix by following
the general argument passing patterns used with parseArg() and parseArgs().
Please report these bugs and/or submit patches to fix them.
I also removed a number of Java Lucene deprecated methods as this is the main
purpose of the upcoming Java Lucene 2.0 release. I had to fix many unit tests
and samples along the way. Most of the changes had to do with using the new
Field() creation APIs and the new BooleanQuery clause adding APIs.
Andi..
_______________________________________________
pylucene-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/pylucene-dev
_______________________________________________
pylucene-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/pylucene-dev
_______________________________________________
pylucene-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/pylucene-dev
