Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Oct 6, 2008, at 3:54 PM, Robert Kern wrote:
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Oct 6, 2008, at 11:51 AM, Robert Kern wrote:
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Oct 6, 2008, at 10:38 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Robert Kern wrote:
Oh, never mind. I see what you're saying. But then why do we need
cython.py if
everything is provided by Cython/__init__.py?
At least for me, Python cannot import it by the name "cython" if
only
Cython/... is available. And I think we want "import cython" (not
"import
Cython") to work, as lowercase is more consistent with common
Python
naming schemes in general and just "feels more right" for such
core
language functionality.
(Also the module name would otherwise need to change in a lot of
places --
when compiling under Cython, as opposed to running in Python,
"cython" is
a magic, hard-wired module and "Cython" will not work, at least
currently
(and my opinion is it never should))
My thoughts exactly. I think the "cython compiler codebase" and the
"cython magic module" as completely separate concepts. The only
reason Cython/__init__.py does anything is to be a workaround for
case insensitive filesystems.
In that case, I would recommend not using "cython" and pick another
name that
won't cause problems on such systems.
But it doesn't cause a problem on such systems. Personally, I can't
think of any name that would be more appropriate than "cython."
I guess it will probably not cause many problems. It's just a code
smell that I
would avoid. You're repeating code. And making cython.py do double-
duty as both
a module in site-packages and a script in /usr/local/bin adds to
the code smell.
Oh, and don't forget to add cython.py to py_modules=, otherwise I
don't think it
will get installed correctly.
For those who want to ship sources without the cython dependancy, I
they would just copy Shadow.py and name in cython.py in their own
directory.
Ah. I see the intended workflow, now.
Maybe there's a cleaner way to do this without renaming
either "cython" or "Cython." Or should we put it there for testing
purposes?
Personally, I'd just rename the thing to "cythonize" and avoid the whole mess. I
don't see much profit in building multiple workarounds just to keep a name.
While I'm looking at the setup.py script, why are the modules in
pyximport being
listed separately in py_modules= instead of being listed as a
package in packages=?
I'm not sure, other than that I wasn't able to get the "obvious" way
to work right away. I'm not distutils guru though, so if there's a
better way I'd welcome a patch.
The attached should do.
--
Robert Kern
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
diff -r f4b39b81687b setup.py
--- a/setup.py Wed Sep 03 18:24:45 2008 +0200
+++ b/setup.py Mon Oct 06 18:32:29 2008 -0500
@@ -97,10 +97,8 @@
'Cython.Tests',
'Cython.Compiler.Tests',
+ 'pyximport',
],
-
- # pyximport
- py_modules = ["pyximport/pyximport", "pyximport/pyxbuild"],
**setup_args
)_______________________________________________
Cython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
