On 6/18/2012 9:14 AM, Armin Rigo wrote:
Hi all,

We (=fijal and myself) finally released the beta-0.1 version of CFFI.

http://cffi.readthedocs.org/

It is a(nother) simple Foreign Function Interface for Python calling C
code.  I talked about it with a few python core people during the
PyCon sprint; now it's done, with a pure Python part and a compact
(but still 3000 lines) piece of C code.  The goal is for it to be
simple yet as complete as possible; it can be used in places where
ctypes (say) is not applicable or only with platform-specific
difficulties, e.g. to rewrite a "_curses" module in pure Python, or
access the X libraries, etc.

Of course I'm not going to suggest that it should be part of the
standard library right now, but I do hope that over time, should it
prove useful and used, I could come back and make such a suggestion.

Make cffi less buggy (check the tracker for new test cases ;-), faster (closer to swig type wrappers), and easier to use than ctypes, and I am sure there will be interest.

">

(original) (raw)

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:

On 6/18/2012 9:14 AM, Armin Rigo wrote:
Hi all,

We (=fijal and myself) finally released the beta-0.1 version of CFFI.

http://cffi.readthedocs.org/

It is a(nother) simple Foreign Function Interface for Python calling C
code. I talked about it with a few python core people during the
PyCon sprint; now it's done, with a pure Python part and a compact
(but still 3000 lines) piece of C code. The goal is for it to be
simple yet as complete as possible; it can be used in places where
ctypes (say) is not applicable or only with platform-specific
difficulties, e.g. to rewrite a "\_curses" module in pure Python, or
access the X libraries, etc.

Of course I'm not going to suggest that it should be part of the
standard library right now, but I do hope that over time, should it
prove useful and used, I could come back and make such a suggestion.

Make cffi less buggy (check the tracker for new test cases ;-), faster (closer to swig type wrappers), and easier to use than ctypes, and I am sure there will be interest.

I would say it's already fulfilling those three, but I suppose you should try for yourself.

Cheers,
fijal