Hi Henning, >From the current pythonocc master branch on github, you can select, from the cmake installer, the wrapper you want to compile. It's then actually possible to cutomize your own pythonocc according to your needs.
I'm not in favor of creating a pythonocc light, because it will be impossible to determine the "100 or so most used classes and methods" (by who? in which context?). Thomas 2011/12/13 Henning Meyer <tutm...@gmail.com> > BTW: would it make sense to create a pythonocc-light just covering the 100 > or so most used classes and methods? > Am 13.12.2011 06:16 schrieb "Thomas Paviot" <tpav...@gmail.com>: > >> 2011/12/12 Sébastien Ramage <sebastien.ram...@gmail.com> >> >>> Hi ! >>> >>> I just compile OCE 0.8 and the last pythonocc 0.6dev and everything is >>> fine but I'm very surprised about the size of pythonocc. >>> OCE takes around 300Mo and pythonocc too... >>> PythonOCC is "just" a wrapper so why does it take so much space ? >>> >>> >>> Seb >>> >>> >> Hi Seb, >> >> The wrapper size does not depend on the C++ code size, but on the number >> of classes/methods/functions. The wrapper for one method/function involves: >> - a python to C conversion >> - the function call >> - a C to python conversion >> >> As OCE defined thousands of classes and dozains of thousands >> methods/functions, the wrapper size is then "big". Have a look at the cpp >> code generated by swig and you'll understand. >> >> Regards, >> >> Thomas >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pythonocc-users mailing list >> Pythonocc-users@gna.org >> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/pythonocc-users >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Pythonocc-users mailing list > Pythonocc-users@gna.org > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/pythonocc-users > >
_______________________________________________ Pythonocc-users mailing list Pythonocc-users@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/pythonocc-users
