On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Roberto De Ioris <robe...@unbit.it> wrot > >> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 7:47 AM, Roberto De Ioris <robe...@unbit.it> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>> Hello Roberto, >>>>> >>>>> If you need help with code or testing I would be glad in help. >>>>> >>>>> Is this work available in some repository? >>>>> >>>>> cheers >>>>> Felipe >>>> >>>> Hi, i have started committing here: >>>> >>>> https://bitbucket.org/pypy/pypy >>> >>> Sorry, i mean >>> >>> https://bitbucket.org/unbit/pypy >>> >>> ;) >>> >>> >>>> >>>> The current Py_Initialize() implementation is very skeletal. It should >>>> get >>>> some of the bin/py.py (included importing site.py) in the next few >>>> hours. >>>> -- >>>> Roberto De Ioris >>>> http://unbit.it >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Roberto De Ioris >>> http://unbit.it >>> _______________________________________________ >>> pypy-dev mailing list >>> pypy-dev@python.org >>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev >> >> Hi >> >> Isn't Py_Initialize clashing name with stuff exported from cpyext? Can >> it be named PyPy_Initialize or something? >> > > Py_Initialize() is only used for app embedding python. It is not usable > (or used) in c extensions. > > For me there is no problem in renaming it, but i suppose bigger apps (like > blender) would prefer avoiding #ifdef's :) > > > -- > Roberto De Ioris > http://unbit.it
Ok I see. Is the rest of the API used going to be cpyext? If so, then Py_Initialize is indeed a perfect choice. _______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
