[Distutils] swig 1.3.x

[Paul Moore]

Keith Jackson <krjackson@lbl.gov> writes:

> What are folks feelings about supporting recent versions of swig in
> distutils? I'd be willing to do the changes to get this working
> again, but only if people are interested. Right now I just use my
> own run_swig method, but I'd rather have this work as a core part of
> distutils.

I think this is probably a good idea. SWIG 1.1 is pretty much
unmaintained these days, and 1.3 is the de facto current version (even
if it's theoretically not yet designated as stable).

But my interest is purely theoretical. I don't have any code which
uses SWIG at the moment, and there may well be people out there
currently using the Distutils/SWIG 1.1 support, and who can't make the
necessary changes to go to SWIG 1.3 (the two versions aren't
compatible).

If you want to support a gradual migration, maybe it would pe possible
to have SWIG support which recognises a swig_version argument
somewhere, which could be set to 1.1 or 1.3.

Paul.
-- 
This signature intentionally left blank