[Python-3000] how about switching to a preprocessor? (Re: A better way to initialize PyTypeObject) (original) (raw)

Neil Toronto ntoronto at cs.byu.edu
Sat Dec 2 21:58:56 CET 2006

Fredrik Lundh wrote:

Brett Cannon wrote:

So you are basically saying you want the preprocessor step to be lightweight enough that you always develop with the file before the preprocessor is run instead of with some generated file, right? exactly. the developer should never edit generated data (whether that's a separate file fed to the compiler, an include file included by the original file, or auto-generated sections inside the original file). Regardless, one could take a Pyrex bent on this and having Python-like method declarations but have C as the code body:: (some days, I wonder if we shouldn't just include Pyrex and tell every- one to use that for all their extension work. Greg? how much work would it be to equip Pyrex with a "retargetable" backend?)

+10. This is the first thing that popped into my head when you brought up using a preprocessor. I've done extension modules with Pyrex, SWIG, and straight C, and the Pyrex ones are a whole heckuva lot easier to create than anything, and are generally more bug-free.

One potential problem with this idea is that you can't drop into C code without calling an external C function, which may not be acceptable in some instances. Another is that if you want to analyze the performance of your code, you at least have to look at the C code it generates, which is a bit icky. I think that's pretty much going to happen no matter what though, unless the preprocessor is only a very thin wrapper around C.

Neil

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list