On 20 February 2018 at 16:17, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 20:15:27 +0100 Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> wrote:
Nick Coghlan schrieb am 02.02.2018 um 06:47:
to make the various extension module authoring tools easier to discover, rather than having folks assuming that handcrafted calls directly into the CPython C API is their only option.
Or even a competitive option. Tools like Cython or pybind11 go to great length to shave off every bit of overhead from C-API calls, commonly replacing high-level C-API functionality with macros and direct access to data structures. The C/C++ code that they generate is so complex and tuned that it would be infeasible to write and maintain something like that by hand, but it can perfectly be generated, and it usually performs visibly better than most hand-written modules, definitely much better than anything a non-expert could write.
Basically, by not learning the C-API you can benefit from all that highly tuned and specialised code written by C-API experts that the documentation doesn't even tell you about.
Doesn't the documentation ever mention Cython? It probably should (no idea about pybind11, which I've never played with). Perhaps you can open an issue about that?
We mention them in the Extending & Embedding guide, and link out to the page on packaging.python.org that describes them in more detail: https://docs.python.org/3/extending/index.html#recommended-third-party-tools Cheers, Nick. P.S. There are also a number of open issues at https://github.com/pypa/python-packaging-user-guide/issues regarding additional projects that should be mentioned in https://packaging.python.org/guides/packaging-binary-extensions/ -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia