Matthieu Brucher wrote: > > I think the default for the standard python distutils is to use the > compiler and the compiler settings for the C compiler that were > used to > build Python itself. There might be ways to specify other > compilers; but > if you have a shared python library build with one compiler and > modules > build with another you might run into trouble if the two compilers > use > different system libraries which are not resolved by standard python > build. > > > > Well, the Intel compiler uses the same libraries than gcc on Linux, > and on Windows, I don't know, but it is possible to mix VS2003 and > VS2005, whuch is forbidden by the distutils, so I find this too > restricting although understandable. It is possible to mix object code, but not runtime, which is the problem AFAIK. VS2003 and VS2005 have different C runtimes (msvcrt7.1.dll against msvcrt8.dll). The problem is (at least for me, who just go through the pain for windows users :) ) that VS2003 is not available anymore for free... > > > I believe that numpy is similar in the sense that you can always build > additional modules with the compilers that were used to build the > numpy > core; then, using two fortran based modules (say) will work well > because > both require the same shared system libraries of the compiler. > Probably, > the compiler options used to build numpy will also work for your > additinal modules (with respect to paths to linear algebra > libraries and > so on). > > > > No, in this case, I want to build with icc and special compiler > options. I tried by build by hand - and CMake - the libraries, it > works like a charm and it is very very fast compared to gcc :( Which libraries are you talking about ? Also, beware that ICC uses by default some flags which are potentially dangerous (I don't know if this is true anymore, but ICC used to use the equivalent of --ffast-math of gcc by default: http://david.monniaux.free.fr/dotclear/index.php/2006/03/17/4-l-art-de-calculer-le-minimum-de-deux-nombres). For libraries like atlas, I don't think there will be a huge difference between ICC and gcc; if you use the mkl, then you don't care :) > > > Again, I think there could be ways to build with different > compilers, but > you do run the risk of incompatibilities with the shared libraries. > Therefore, I have become used to build python with the C-compiler kI'd > like to use, even if that means a lot of work. > > > > This would mean building every other modules added - numpy, scipy, > matplotlib, wxPython, ... -, doable, but I'd prefer not to do it, but > if it is not possible, I would have to live with it... I think it is important to separate different issues: object code compatibility, runtime compatibility, etc... Those are different issues. First, mixing ICC compiled code and gcc code *has* to be possible (I have never tried), otherwise, I don't see much use for it under linux. Then you have the problem of runtime services: I really doubt that ICC runtime is not compatible with gcc, and more globally with the GNU runtime (glibc, etc...); actually, ICC used to use the "standard" linux runtime, and I would be surprised if that changed.
To say it simply: on linux at least, what should matter is whether the runtime services are compatible (on windows, it looks like they are not: official python is compiled with visual studio 2003, and you cannot use VS 2005; note that mingw seems to work). David _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
