On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:59, Gabriel Becedillas wrote: > Donovan Baarda wrote: [...] > > Wow... you guys sure did it the hard way. If you had done it at the > > Python level, you would have had a much easier time of both implementing > > and updating it. [...] > Hi, thanks for your reply. > The problem I see with the aproach you're sugesting is that I have to > rewrite a lot of code to make it work the way I want. We allready have > the syscall proxying stuff with an stdio layer on top of it. I should > have to rewrite some parts of some modules and use my own versions of > stdio functions, and that is pretty much the same as we have done before. > There are also native objects that use stdio functions, and I should > replace those ones too, or modules that have some native code that uses > stdio, or sockets. I should duplicate those files, and make the same > kind of search/replace work that we have done previously and that we'd > like to avoid. > Please let me know if I misunderstood you.
Nope... you got it all figured out. I guess it depends on what degree of "proxying" you want... I thought there was some stuff you wanted re-directed, and some you didn't. The point is, you _can_ do this at the Python level, and you only have to modify Python code, not C Python source. However, if you want to proxy everything, then the glib wrapper is probably the best approach, provided you really want to code in C and have your own Python binary. -- Donovan Baarda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
