[MATRIX-SIG] compiling NumPy for Windows

[Paul F. Dubois]

No, we need to supply project files for Windows and your stuff for Unix. I'm
in the process of doing that. In the process I'm trying to rationalize the
arrangement of the source directory. I have the Wise installer software and
am learning how to use it for making the Windows installer.

I'm going to proceed on the premise that the installation on each platform
includes the library and include files because such a high percentage of
users are also going to be extenders.  I will have a proposal for you
shortly about what I think the "installed" and "source" sides should look
like. Suggestions are welcome, of course.

Too bad I don't have more experience on Windows...here are some questions I
could stand some help with.

a. I believe an "extender" would need the .lib and the .pyd both. What about
the .exp file? The .def? Anything else?
b. How do you tell Wise to adjust Python's path in the registry?

I will eventually digest all of this but any pointers would help me get this
out faster.



-----Original Message-----
From: Konrad Hinsen <hinsen@ibs.ibs.fr>
To: da@skivs.ski.org <da@skivs.ski.org>
Cc: matrix-sig@python.org <matrix-sig@python.org>
Date: Tuesday, February 03, 1998 8:38 AM
Subject: Re: [MATRIX-SIG] compiling NumPy for Windows


>> Here's the issue -- with the latest Microsoft Visual compiler suite, the
>> GUI is the predominant way to manipulate the build process.  While it can
>> (somewhat) read old makefiles, and it can export makefiles, I think there
>> will be less and less support for that over the years -- for example, I
>
>I'd call that a serious problem for scientific applications, where
>distribution of source code is nothing unusual. Even if you adopt the
>Microsoft point of view that non-Windows systems don't matter, you
>still need executables for different chips (currently Intel and
>Alpha), and you can't expect every program author to have all systems
>available for producing binaries.
>
>> Well, there is no equivalent to Makefile.pre.in on PC's.  There's the
>> registry, which tells you about things like version number & where the
>> binaries & Lib directory are, but there is no way to find out
>> automatically where the source tree is.
>
>You don't need the source tree for compiling extensions. If you can
>locate the libraries and header files, that's sufficient.
>
>> Such an extension compilation tool would be easier to write if one could
>> assume that Mark Hammond's Registry and COM tools were installed, as
>> they'd make talking to the registry and compiler much easier.
>
>That doesn't sound like an unrealistic assumption.
>
>> I haven't heard anyone on this list mention anything but Microsoft's
>> compiler.
>
>But there's a port of gcc plus some Unix tools to Windows, right?
>Would it make sense to recommend this to Windows users? It should
>make porting Unix stuff much easier.
>
>Konrad.
>--
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>Konrad Hinsen                          | E-Mail: hinsen@ibs.ibs.fr
>Laboratoire de Dynamique Moleculaire   | Tel.: +33-4.76.88.99.28
>Institut de Biologie Structurale       | Fax:  +33-4.76.88.54.94
>41, av. des Martyrs                    | Deutsch/Esperanto/English/
>38027 Grenoble Cedex 1, France         | Nederlands/Francais
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>
>_______________
>MATRIX-SIG  - SIG on Matrix Math for Python
>
>send messages to: matrix-sig@python.org
>administrivia to: matrix-sig-request@python.org
>_______________
>


_______________
MATRIX-SIG  - SIG on Matrix Math for Python

send messages to: matrix-sig@python.org
administrivia to: matrix-sig-request@python.org
_______________