On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:17 AM, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Stefan Krah ste...@bytereef.org wrote:
Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib. This is
Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
Ubuntu compiles their Python with FDO (feedback directed optimization /
profile
guided optimization) enabled. All distros should do this if they don't
already.
It's generally 20% interpreter speedup. Our makefile already supports it but
it
isn't
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:07 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:17 AM, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Stefan Krah ste...@bytereef.org
wrote:
Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Stefan Krah ste...@bytereef.org wrote:
Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib. This is a project Armin Rigo has been working
for a while, with some input from
Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib. This is a project Armin Rigo has been working
for a while, with some input from other developers.
I've tried cffi (admittedly only in a toy script) and find
Maybe someone from PyPy should bring this up as an official topic at the
language summit to figure out the blockers (again). Or it can join regex on
the list of module discussed for addition at the language summit but never
quite pushed to commitment. =)
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Stefan
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
Maybe someone from PyPy should bring this up as an official topic at the
language summit to figure out the blockers (again). Or it can join regex on
the list of module discussed for addition at the language summit but never
On 18 Dec 2013 06:21, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
Maybe someone from PyPy should bring this up as an official topic at the
language summit to figure out the blockers (again). Or it can join
regex on
the
Hi Gregory,
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
So would you say that the main use of the API level is provide an
alternative for writing C API code to interface to C libraries. IOW,
Hi,
looks like no-one's taken over the role of the Advocatus Diaboli yet. =)
Maciej Fijalkowski, 26.02.2013 16:13:
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib. This is a project Armin Rigo has been working
for a while, with some input from other
Hi Stefan,
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
You say that the API is fairly stable. What about the implementation?
Will users want to install a new version next to the stdlib one in a couple
of months,
I think that the implementation is fairly stable as
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
I read the cffi docs once again and went through some of the examples. I
want to divide this to two topics.
One is what you call the ABI level. IMHO, it's hands down superior to
ctypes. Your readdir demo
Hi Neil,
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Neil Hodgson nyamaton...@me.com wrote:
Wouldn't it be better to understand the SAL annotations like _In_opt so
that spurious NULLs (for example) produce a good exception from cffi instead
of failing inside the system call?
Maybe. Feel like
On 27 February 2013 23:18, Armin Rigo ar...@tunes.org wrote:
from cffi import FFI
ffi = FFI()
ffi.cdef(
int MessageBox(HWND hWnd, LPCTSTR lpText, LPCTSTR lpCaption, UINT uType);
)
lib = ffi.dlopen(USER32.DLL)
lib.MessageBox(ffi.NULL, Hello, world!, Title, 0)
Yeah, that's loads better
Hi Paul,
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
Presumably ffi.NULL isn't needed and I can use 0? (After all, 0 and NULL are
equivalent in C, so that's
not a correctness issue).
Indeed. I created
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 February 2013 23:18, Armin Rigo ar...@tunes.org wrote:
from cffi import FFI
ffi = FFI()
ffi.cdef(
int MessageBox(HWND hWnd, LPCTSTR lpText, LPCTSTR lpCaption, UINT uType);
)
lib = ffi.dlopen(USER32.DLL)
On 28 February 2013 09:06, Armin Rigo ar...@tunes.org wrote:
And I think
that even on 64-bit Windows, passing 0 as a NULL pointer is buggy,
because it will pass a 32-bit 0. (It may be that it doesn't actually
make a difference and works anyway, but I'm not sure.) Similarly, a
function that
Le Thu, 28 Feb 2013 10:57:50 +1300,
Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz a écrit :
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
We have to find sufficiently silly species of snakes, though.
Glancing through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_snakes,
we have:
Wart snakes
Java wart snakes
Pipe snakes
Le Thu, 28 Feb 2013 10:06:00 +0100,
Armin Rigo ar...@tunes.org a écrit :
Yes, you're right, and the 32-bit Windows platform is still important.
However, it only works on 32-bit. On typical 64-bit Posix
environments, if you don't declare argtypes/restype, you usually end
up very quickly
Armin Rigo:
Maybe. Feel like adding an issue to
https://bitbucket.org/cffi/cffi/issues, with references?
OK, issue #62 added.
This looks
like a Windows-specific extension, which means that I don't
automatically know about it.
While SAL is Windows-specific, gcc supports some
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 3:39 AM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 2/26/2013 10:13 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib.
How does it compare in terms of speed. One reason ctypes has not replaces
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
* Work either at the level of the ABI (Application Binary Interface)
or the API (Application Programming Interface). Usually, C libraries
have a specified C API but often not an ABI (e.g. they may document a
“struct” as
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Ronald Oussoren ronaldousso...@mac.com wrote:
On 26 Feb, 2013, at 16:13, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib.
The API in general looks nice, but I do
On 27 Feb, 2013, at 10:06, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Ronald Oussoren ronaldousso...@mac.com
wrote:
On 26 Feb, 2013, at 16:13, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Ronald Oussoren
ronaldousso...@mac.com wrote:
On 27 Feb, 2013, at 10:06, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Ronald Oussoren ronaldousso...@mac.com
wrote:
On 26 Feb, 2013, at 16:13, Maciej Fijalkowski
On 27/02/2013 9:21am, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
That's somehting that will have to be resolved before cffi can be included in
the stdlib, fat binaries are supported by CPython and are used the binary
installers.
Ronald
if cpython supports it and you can load it using dlopen, it does work
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Richard Oudkerk shibt...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27/02/2013 9:21am, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
That's somehting that will have to be resolved before cffi can be
included in the stdlib, fat binaries are supported by CPython and are used
the binary installers.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
3. Cffi basicly contains a (limited) C parser, and those are notoriously
hard to get exactly right. Luckily cffi only needs to interpret declarations
and not the full language, but even so this can be a risk of subtle
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
3. Cffi basicly contains a (limited) C parser, and those are notoriously
hard to get exactly right. Luckily cffi only needs to interpret
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
2. Using a function called verify to create stuff. This may sound like a
naming bikeshed, but it's not. It ties in to the question - why is this
Le Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:15:05 +1300,
Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz a écrit :
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Or we'll go straight to 5.
(or switch to date-based numbering :-))
We could go the Apple route and start naming them after
species of snake.
We have to find sufficiently silly
On 2013-02-27, at 14:31 , Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:15:05 +1300,
Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz a écrit :
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Or we'll go straight to 5.
(or switch to date-based numbering :-))
We could go the Apple route and start naming them after
species of
On 27 February 2013 10:31, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Le Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:15:05 +1300,
Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz a écrit :
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Or we'll go straight to 5.
(or switch to date-based numbering :-))
We could go the Apple route and start
Hi Guido,
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
From a software engineering perspective, 10 years is indistinguishable
from infinity, so I don't care what happens 10 years from now -- as
long as you don't blame me. :-)
I can't resist: around today it is the
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:29 PM, Ronald Oussoren ronaldousso...@mac.comwrote:
On 26 Feb, 2013, at 16:13, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib.
The API in general looks nice, but
I read the cffi docs once again and went through some of the examples. I
want to divide this to two topics.
One is what you call the ABI level. IMHO, it's hands down superior to
ctypes. Your readdir demo demonstrates this very nicely. I would
definitely
want to see this in the stdlib
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
I read the cffi docs once again and went through some of the examples. I
want to divide this to two topics.
One is what you call the ABI level. IMHO, it's hands down superior to
ctypes. Your readdir demo demonstrates
On 27 February 2013 11:53, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it means you can't use the ABI version and specify the calling
convention. It's a reasonable bug report (the calling convention on
API version works though)
That would be a deal-breaker for my use case of quick
27 February 2013 18:24, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 February 2013 11:53, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it means you can't use the ABI version and specify the calling
convention. It's a reasonable bug report (the calling convention on
API version works
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
27 February 2013 18:24, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 February 2013 11:53, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it means you can't use the ABI version and specify the calling
convention.
Hi Paul,
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 February 2013 11:53, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it means you can't use the ABI version and specify the calling
convention. It's a reasonable bug report (the calling convention on
API
On 27 February 2013 19:08, Armin Rigo ar...@tunes.org wrote:
That's not correct: you can't indeed give the calling convention, but
it is not needed for the common case. What is not supported is only
Python-defined callbacks using the Windows-specific convention --- as
documented, there is a
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:18 AM, Ronald Oussoren ronaldousso...@mac.com wrote:
On 27 Feb, 2013, at 10:06, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Ronald Oussoren ronaldousso...@mac.com
wrote:
On 26 Feb, 2013, at 16:13, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com
On 27 February 2013 19:26, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 27 February 2013 19:08, Armin Rigo ar...@tunes.org wrote:
That's not correct: you can't indeed give the calling convention, but
it is not needed for the common case. What is not supported is only
Python-defined callbacks
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
We have to find sufficiently silly species of snakes, though.
Glancing through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_snakes,
we have:
Wart snakes
Java wart snakes
Pipe snakes
Stiletto snakes
Rubber boas
Dog-faced water snakes
Shovel-nosed snakes
Hook-nosed snakes
On 2/27/2013 3:31 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
from ctypes import windll
MessageBox = windll.User32.MessageBoxW
MessageBox(0, Hello, world!, Title, 0)
Note - I wrote this from memory,
Gee, that is pretty easy. Worked perfectly
--
Terry Jan Reedy
___
Hi Paul,
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
from ctypes import windll
MessageBox = windll.User32.MessageBoxW
MessageBox(0, Hello, world!, Title, 0)
You are right that it's a bit cumbersome in cffi up to and including
0.5, but in the cffi trunk all standard
Armin Rigo:
So the general answer to your question is: we google MessageBox and
copy that line from the microsoft site, and manually remove the
unnecessary WINAPI and _In_opt declarations:
Wouldn't it be better to understand the SAL annotations like _In_opt so that
spurious NULLs (for
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib. This is a project Armin Rigo has been working
for a while, with some input from other developers. It seems that the
main reason why people would prefer ctypes over cffi these days is
because it's
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib.
I think cffi is well worth considering as a
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib. This is a project Armin Rigo has been working
for a while, with some input from other developers. It seems that the
main
Le Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:13:44 +0200,
Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com a écrit :
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib. This is a project Armin Rigo has been working
for a while, with some input from other developers. It seems
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib.
I think cffi is well worth
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the language summit a
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Le Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:13:44 +0200,
Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com a écrit :
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib. This is a project Armin Rigo has
Hi,
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you intend to actually maintain it inside the CPython repository?
Once we put it in, yes, of course. Me Armin and Alex.
Yes, I confirm. :-)
Armin
___
Python-Dev
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:39 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:13 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com
+1
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Eli Bendersky
On 26 February 2013 16:34, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm cautiously +0.5 because I'd really like to see a strong comparison case
being made vs. ctypes. I've used ctypes many times and it was easy and
effortless (well, except the segfaults when wrong argument types are
declared :-).
On 26 February 2013 18:34, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
One point which I *think* is correct, but which I don't see noted
anywhere. Am I right that cffi needs a C compiler involved in the
process, at least somewhere? If that's the case, then it is not a
suitable option for at
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 February 2013 16:34, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm cautiously +0.5 because I'd really like to see a strong comparison case
being made vs. ctypes. I've used ctypes many times and it was easy and
effortless
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:14:26 +, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
BTW, I assume that the intention is that both cffi and ctypes remain
available indefinitely? Nobody's looking to deprecate ctypes?
I would expect that ctypes would be deprecated eventually simply because
there aren't very
Generally speaking, deferring something to Python 4 means never.
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:06 AM, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:14:26 +, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
BTW, I assume that the intention is that both cffi and ctypes remain
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
Generally speaking, deferring something to Python 4 means never.
Does that mean your aversion to double digit version numbers (i.e. 3.10) is
gone or you expect to freeze Python in carbonite by then?
-Brett
On Tue,
With 1.5 years per release, it'd be 10 years before we'd hit 3.10.
From a software engineering perspective, 10 years is indistinguishable
from infinity, so I don't care what happens 10 years from now -- as
long as you don't blame me. :-)
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Brett Cannon
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 14:21:03 -0500
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
Generally speaking, deferring something to Python 4 means never.
Does that mean your aversion to double digit version numbers (i.e. 3.10) is
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Or we'll go straight to 5.
(or switch to date-based numbering :-))
We could go the Apple route and start naming them after
species of snake.
--
Greg
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
On 2/26/2013 10:13 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib.
How does it compare in terms of speed. One reason ctypes has not
replaces hand-tuned swig is that it apparently is much slower. I know
that someone,
* Work either at the level of the ABI (Application Binary Interface)
or the API (Application Programming Interface). Usually, C libraries
have a specified C API but often not an ABI (e.g. they may document a
“struct” as having at least these fields, but maybe more). (ctypes
works at the ABI
On 26 Feb, 2013, at 16:13, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
of cffi[1] into stdlib.
The API in general looks nice, but I do have some concens w.r.t. including cffi
in the stdlib.
1. Why is cffi
73 matches
Mail list logo
