Re: dispatch: using SWIG

2014-05-29 Thread Rafael Schloming
If you're strictly concerned about C - Python interop and not concerned with providing bindings in other languages, there are a number of other tools that could help (cffi, ctypes, and Cython). This page lists them and talks about some of their pros and cons:

Re: dispatch: using SWIG

2014-05-29 Thread Alan Conway
On Thu, 2014-05-29 at 08:31 -0400, Rafael Schloming wrote: If you're strictly concerned about C - Python interop and not concerned with providing bindings in other languages, there are a number of other tools that could help (cffi, ctypes, and Cython). This page lists them and talks about some

Re: dispatch: using SWIG

2014-05-29 Thread Alan Conway
On Thu, 2014-05-29 at 12:37 -0400, Alan Conway wrote: My concern is that as the boundary of interaction grows it will become complicated and error-prone to maintain hand-written wrappers. E.g. look at router_pynode.c. It's a lot of hand-written call-Python-from-C code to generate a python

Re: dispatch: using SWIG

2014-05-28 Thread Darryl L. Pierce
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 08:06:44AM -0400, Alan Conway wrote: What's the general feeling about using SWIG in dispatch? To date dispatch uses hand-crafted calls based on Python.h primitives. My impression is that works OK for a small python/C interface but the interface is getting to the point

Re: dispatch: using SWIG

2014-05-23 Thread Ted Ross
I have no objections to using Swig. It's a build-only dependency. Keep in mind that Swig is only useful for Python - C calls. If we are going to widen the native API offered to Python, it might be wise to introduce Swig. -Ted On 05/23/2014 08:06 AM, Alan Conway wrote: What's the general