> Hye-Shik Chang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> > I did some work to make ctypes+libffi compacter and liberal. >>> > http://openlook.org/svnpublic/ctypes-compactffi/ (svn) >>> > >> Here goes patches for the integration: >> >> [1] http://people.freebsd.org/~perky/ctypesinteg-f1.diff.bz2 >> [2] http://people.freebsd.org/~perky/ctypesinteg-f2.diff.bz2 >> >> I implemented it in two flavors. [1] runs libffi's configure along with >> Python's and setup.py just builds it. And [2] has no change to >> Python's configure and setup.py runs libffi configure and builds it. >> And both patches don't have things for documentations yet.
[Thomas Heller] > My plan is to make separate ctypes releases for 2.3 and 2.4, even after > it is integrated into Python 2.5, so it seems [2] would be better - it > must be possible to build ctypes without Python. > > As I said before, docs need still to be written. I think content is > more important than markup, so I'm writing in rest, it can be converted > to latex later. I expect that writing the docs will show quite some > edges that need to be cleaned up - that should certainly be done before > the first 2.5 release. > > Also I want to make a few releases before declaring the 1.0 version. > This does not mean that I'm against integrating it right now. "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Not sure whether you think you need further approval: if you are ready > to check this into the Python trunk, just go ahead. As I said, I would > prefer if what is checked in is a literal copy of the ctypes CVS (as > far as reasonable). I was not looking for further approval, I wanted to explain why I prefer the patch [2] that Hye-Shik posted above. I'll do at least one separate ctypes release before checking this into the Python trunk. Thanks, Thomas _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com