Re: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch
> > 2007/10/3, Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Reason I'm asking if IronPython doesn't require interop assemblies to > > access COM objects then the issue of supporting pythong standard > > libraries become atleast less of an issue? There's "feature compatibility" (both products support COM) and "source compatibility" (my COM-using app runs unchanged under either CPython or IronPython). Whether or not feature compatibility is sufficient is presumably going to be up to the community and the way it votes for changes. On 10/3/07, Sanghyeon Seo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I can't see how two are related, given that Python standard library > doesn't use COM. There is COM support in the Pythonwin extensions. Some people might consider this to be part of the standard library under Windows, even though it's not an official part of Python. -- Curt Hagenlocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
Re: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch
2007/10/3, Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Reason I'm asking if IronPython doesn't require interop assemblies to > access COM objects then the issue of supporting pythong standard > libraries become atleast less of an issue? I can't see how two are related, given that Python standard library doesn't use COM. -- Seo Sanghyeon ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
Re: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch
This might be a stupid question but does all this have any effect on the number of python standard libraries supported by IronPython. Reason I'm asking if IronPython doesn't require interop assemblies to access COM objects then the issue of supporting pythong standard libraries become atleast less of an issue? On 10/2/07, Dino Viehland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I pinged the dev who's been working on this (he's actually on another team), > here's the response I got: > > We have not done comprehensive performance tests to find out differences > between the two. Some time ago I tried to put a timer into test_cominterop.py > where it iterated through an Excel 20x20 table and set values to it. In this > test IDispatch-based calls turned out to be a bit faster. > > Which of the two is better? IDispatch based implementation requires TypeLibs, > while the other approach would need to have Interop Assemblies deployed. So, > from this perspective IDispatch-based option is more flexible (although there > is still a long road to have full fidelity between the two). > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lee Culver > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 9:55 AM > To: Discussion of IronPython > Subject: Re: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch > > Interesting. Which of the two is "better"? Is there a performance tradeoff > turning it on or off with COM objects which do or do not implement IDispatch? > > Thanks, > -Lee > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dino Viehland > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 8:56 AM > To: Discussion of IronPython > Subject: Re: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch > > This enables using new support for COM objects that uses COM's IDispatch > interface instead of trying to get a TypeInfo for the object and use that to > invoke it. With it enabled we'll first check for IDispatch then to see if we > can get the TypeInfo, w/o it we'll check for the TypeInfo (via > IProvideClassInfo or via IDispatch) and then try IDispatch if that fails. > > -Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 7:35 AM > To: Discussion of IronPython > Subject: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch > > Hi, > > Can anyone eleaborate a bit more on the -X:PreferComDispatch option? > > Does it mean extended support for standard libraries? What does the > prefer part stand for as in prefer com over what? > > BR > Martin > ___ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > ___ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > ___ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > ___ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
Re: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch
I pinged the dev who's been working on this (he's actually on another team), here's the response I got: We have not done comprehensive performance tests to find out differences between the two. Some time ago I tried to put a timer into test_cominterop.py where it iterated through an Excel 20x20 table and set values to it. In this test IDispatch-based calls turned out to be a bit faster. Which of the two is better? IDispatch based implementation requires TypeLibs, while the other approach would need to have Interop Assemblies deployed. So, from this perspective IDispatch-based option is more flexible (although there is still a long road to have full fidelity between the two). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lee Culver Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 9:55 AM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: Re: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch Interesting. Which of the two is "better"? Is there a performance tradeoff turning it on or off with COM objects which do or do not implement IDispatch? Thanks, -Lee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dino Viehland Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 8:56 AM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: Re: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch This enables using new support for COM objects that uses COM's IDispatch interface instead of trying to get a TypeInfo for the object and use that to invoke it. With it enabled we'll first check for IDispatch then to see if we can get the TypeInfo, w/o it we'll check for the TypeInfo (via IProvideClassInfo or via IDispatch) and then try IDispatch if that fails. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 7:35 AM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch Hi, Can anyone eleaborate a bit more on the -X:PreferComDispatch option? Does it mean extended support for standard libraries? What does the prefer part stand for as in prefer com over what? BR Martin ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
Re: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch
Interesting. Which of the two is "better"? Is there a performance tradeoff turning it on or off with COM objects which do or do not implement IDispatch? Thanks, -Lee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dino Viehland Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 8:56 AM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: Re: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch This enables using new support for COM objects that uses COM's IDispatch interface instead of trying to get a TypeInfo for the object and use that to invoke it. With it enabled we'll first check for IDispatch then to see if we can get the TypeInfo, w/o it we'll check for the TypeInfo (via IProvideClassInfo or via IDispatch) and then try IDispatch if that fails. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 7:35 AM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch Hi, Can anyone eleaborate a bit more on the -X:PreferComDispatch option? Does it mean extended support for standard libraries? What does the prefer part stand for as in prefer com over what? BR Martin ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
Re: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch
This enables using new support for COM objects that uses COM's IDispatch interface instead of trying to get a TypeInfo for the object and use that to invoke it. With it enabled we'll first check for IDispatch then to see if we can get the TypeInfo, w/o it we'll check for the TypeInfo (via IProvideClassInfo or via IDispatch) and then try IDispatch if that fails. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 7:35 AM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: [IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch Hi, Can anyone eleaborate a bit more on the -X:PreferComDispatch option? Does it mean extended support for standard libraries? What does the prefer part stand for as in prefer com over what? BR Martin ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
[IronPython] -X:PreferComDispatch
Hi, Can anyone eleaborate a bit more on the -X:PreferComDispatch option? Does it mean extended support for standard libraries? What does the prefer part stand for as in prefer com over what? BR Martin ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
