[Distutils] Dynamic linking on Linux, Mac OS, et al
stephen.langer at nist.gov
Wed Jan 11 21:32:30 CET 2006
On Jan 6, 2006, at 10:27 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
> On Jan 6, 2006, at 6:55 PM, Stephen Langer wrote:
>> On Jan 6, 2006, at 11:33 AM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>> On Jan 6, 2006, at 8:19 AM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>>>> The issue for the PyICU/PyLucene etc. use cases is that there
>>>> are a whole
>>>> bunch of SWIG wrappers for different extensions, but with a
>>>> large common
>>>> library for type mapping etc. The authors want a shared library
>>>> for *their
>>>> own code* that is used by multiple extensions. This is not
>>>> distributed code.
>>> It'd be better if these projects just fixed themselves to do things
>>> the "right" way, using a Python extension and a function table.
>> Can you explain to me in more detail what the "right" way is? I
>> have a large number of swig wrapper files for a large number of C+
>> + files. The program has a small number of core shared libraries
>> that are always loaded, and a few that are optional. The shared
>> library code is written in C++. Sometimes classes defined in the
>> core libraries are used as base classes for classes defined in the
>> optional libraries. All of this can be handled easily with shared
>> libraries. How can it be done with function tables?
> Numeric, Numarray, pygame, PyObjC, etc. are good references for how
> to export bits of C API as a function table. I don't use C++
> unless I have to, so I'm not familiar enough with it to say whether
> or not it's going to cause problems given how you want to use it.
> Maybe it's not possible without refactoring the optional library
> code to work some other way.
Ok, I've looked at some of these examples. I haven't had the time to
go through their mechanisms in detail, but it seems that under the
hood they don't do anything terribly different from what swig does.
I still don't see how they pertain to solving the shared library
problem, and how doing things the "right" way makes shared libraries
If extension A and extension B both require routine Z, and there's no
python extension for routine Z, isn't the best solution to put Z in a
I hope I'm not being dense here. We have lots of python extensions,
all of which link to a relatively small number of shared libraries,
and I'd like to understand why this setup is "wrong".
-- EMail: stephen.langer at nist.gov Phone: (301)
-- WWW: http://math.nist.gov/mcsd/Staff/SLanger/ Fax: (301)
-- Mail: NIST; 100 Bureau Drive -- Stop 8910; Gaithersburg, Md
-- "I don't think this will work. That's why it's
-- Naomi Langer, 17 Feb
More information about the Distutils-SIG