On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman@gmail.com> wrote:
2009/10/26 geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com>
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman@gmail.com> wrote:
2009/10/26 geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com>
[snip...]
Firstly, although you are correct that .NET supports a managed variant of C++ (that runs 'on .NET') and it is the same set of tools that you also use to compile native code (unmanaged C/C++) this has nothing to do with .NET. Python for Windows is compiled with the Visual C++ compiler but it doesn't run on .NET. .NET doesn't even use the MSVCRT that compiled native code links against - something that causes Ironclad 'difficulties' when managed and native code need to share file handles.
Ironclad itself has binary compatibility with Python C extensions, they don't need to be recompiled. It uses the .NET FFI (P/Invoke) to work with these extensions and on the JVM would use its FFI.
My understanding is that Android now allows native code, so if Dalvik has the same FFI APIs and you can compile the Python extensions for it *and* Jython runs on Dalvik (not currently the case I believe?) then it could work...
No need. Java has the Java Native Interface, which is supported in the Android Native Development Kit.
No need for what? If you are using Jython *and* you want to use Python C extensions then something like Ironclad would be needed.
If you aren't using Jython then no need - but there are lots of good reasons for *wanting* to use Jython.
Michael
Sorry, I wasn't clear- there's no need to get Jython running on Android, since you can wrap the class libraries using JNI.
There are all sorts of reasons to want to use Jython and being on a fundamentally Java oriented platform sounds like just about the best reason I can imagine.
Michael
But Jython doesn't run on Dalvik, so its kind of a nonissue. Geremy Condra