[IronPython] Announcement: Project to get some CPython C extensions running under IronPython

[Dino Viehland]

+1 on the MC++, this seems like an ideal use of it.

From: users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com [mailto:users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Curt Hagenlocher
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 11:38 AM
To: Discussion of IronPython
Subject: Re: [IronPython] Announcement: Project to get some CPython C extensions running under IronPython

On 10/12/07, Giles Thomas <giles.thomas at resolversystems.com<mailto:giles.thomas at resolversystems.com>> wrote:

What is the best architecture?  We're thinking of this as being a bit of C# managed code to interface with the C extension, and a thin Python wrapper on top.  The module's existing C extension and Python code would "sandwich" this layer.  Let us know if this is a silly idea :-)
My two cents would be this: using Managed C++, try for source compatibility first.  It will almost certainly be less work than binary compatibility -- especially given your restricted test case -- and you're not likely to do much coding that wouldn't be needed for binary compatibility anyway.

--
Curt Hagenlocher
curt at hagenlocher.org<mailto:curt at hagenlocher.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/ironpython-users/attachments/20071012/702e58d1/attachment.html>