Re: DRAFT Introduce CFFI-based Python bindings

2017-12-03 Thread Tomi Ollila
On Wed, Nov 29 2017, Floris Bruynooghe wrote: > David Bremner writes: > >> Floris Bruynooghe writes: >> >>> >>> Lastly there are some downsides to the choices I made: >>> - I ended up going squarely for CPython 3.6+. Choosing Python >>> 3 allowed better API

Re: DRAFT Introduce CFFI-based Python bindings

2017-12-01 Thread Floris Bruynooghe
Florian Klink writes: >>> I guess you'll have to convince the maintainers / users of alot and afew >>> that this makes sense before we go much further. I'd point out that >>> Debian stable is only at python 3.5, so that makes me a bit wary of this >>> (being able to run the

Re: DRAFT Introduce CFFI-based Python bindings

2017-11-30 Thread Florian Klink
I guess you'll have to convince the maintainers / users of alot and afew that this makes sense before we go much further. I'd point out that Debian stable is only at python 3.5, so that makes me a bit wary of this (being able to run the test suite on debian stable and similar aged distros useful

Re: DRAFT Introduce CFFI-based Python bindings

2017-11-29 Thread Floris Bruynooghe
Patrick Totzke writes: > Quoting David Bremner (2017-11-28 23:59:26) >> Floris Bruynooghe writes: >> >> > >> > Lastly there are some downsides to the choices I made: >> > - I ended up going squarely for CPython 3.6+. Choosing Python >> > 3 allowed

Re: DRAFT Introduce CFFI-based Python bindings

2017-11-29 Thread Floris Bruynooghe
David Bremner writes: > Floris Bruynooghe writes: > >> >> Lastly there are some downsides to the choices I made: >> - I ended up going squarely for CPython 3.6+. Choosing Python >> 3 allowed better API design, e.g. with keyword-only parameters >> etc.

Re: DRAFT Introduce CFFI-based Python bindings

2017-11-29 Thread Patrick Totzke
Quoting David Bremner (2017-11-28 23:59:26) > Floris Bruynooghe writes: > > > > > Lastly there are some downsides to the choices I made: > > - I ended up going squarely for CPython 3.6+. Choosing Python > > 3 allowed better API design, e.g. with keyword-only parameters > >

Re: DRAFT Introduce CFFI-based Python bindings

2017-11-28 Thread David Bremner
Floris Bruynooghe writes: > > Lastly there are some downsides to the choices I made: > - I ended up going squarely for CPython 3.6+. Choosing Python > 3 allowed better API design, e.g. with keyword-only parameters > etc. Choosing CPython 3.4+ restricts the madness that can