[pypy-dev] cffi in stdlib

[Davide Del Vento]

Well, not so fast :-)
I'm glad you posted it here since I don't follow python-dev (too many 
mailing lists) and I'm happy to hear about this proposal, even if there 
isn't much to discuss about it from the pypy side.

Cheers.
Davide Del Vento,

On 02/26/2013 08:13 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> Eh, I'm a moron, this was supposed to go to python-dev, not here. please ignore
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
>> of cffi[1] into stdlib. This is a project Armin Rigo has been working
>> for a while, with some input from other developers. It seems that the
>> main reason why people would prefer ctypes over cffi these days is
>> "because it's included in stdlib", which is not generally the reason I
>> would like to hear. Our calls to not use C extensions and to use an
>> FFI instead has seen very limited success with ctypes and quite a lot
>> more since cffi got released. The API is fairly stable right now with
>> minor changes going in and it'll definitely stablize until Python 3.4
>> release. Notable projects using it:
>>
>> * pypycore - gevent main loop ported to cffi
>> * pgsql2cffi
>> * sdl-cffi bindings
>> * tls-cffi bindings
>> * lxml-cffi port
>> * cairo-cffi
>> * pyzmq
>> * a bunch of others
>>
>> So relatively a lot given that the project is not even a year old (it
>> got 0.1 release in June). As per documentation, the advantages over
>> ctypes:
>>
>> * The goal is to call C code from Python. You should be able to do so
>> without learning a 3rd language: every alternative requires you to
>> learn their own language (Cython, SWIG) or API (ctypes). So we tried
>> to assume that you know Python and C and minimize the extra bits of
>> API that you need to learn.
>>
>> * Keep all the Python-related logic in Python so that you don’t need
>> to write much C code (unlike CPython native C extensions).
>>
>> * Work either at the level of the ABI (Application Binary Interface)
>> or the API (Application Programming Interface). Usually, C libraries
>> have a specified C API but often not an ABI (e.g. they may document a
>> “struct” as having at least these fields, but maybe more). (ctypes
>> works at the ABI level, whereas Cython and native C extensions work at
>> the API level.)
>>
>> * We try to be complete. For now some C99 constructs are not
>> supported, but all C89 should be, including macros (and including
>> macro “abuses”, which you can manually wrap in saner-looking C
>> functions).
>>
>> * We attempt to support both PyPy and CPython, with a reasonable path
>> for other Python implementations like IronPython and Jython.
>>
>> * Note that this project is not about embedding executable C code in
>> Python, unlike Weave. This is about calling existing C libraries from
>> Python.
>>
>> so among other things, making a cffi extension gives you the same
>> level of security as writing C (and unlike ctypes) and brings quite a
>> bit more flexibility (API vs ABI issue) that let's you wrap arbitrary
>> libraries, even those full of macros.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> fijal
>>
>> .. [1]: http://cffi.readthedocs.org/en/release-0.5/
> _______________________________________________
> pypy-dev mailing list
> pypy-dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
>