[Python-Dev] ctypes patch (was: (libffi) Re: Copyright issue)

Thomas Heller theller at python.net
Tue Feb 7 21:52:07 CET 2006

> Hye-Shik Chang <hyeshik at gmail.com> writes:
>>> > I did some work to make ctypes+libffi compacter and liberal.
>>> > http://openlook.org/svnpublic/ctypes-compactffi/  (svn)
>>> >
>> Here goes patches for the integration:
>> [1] http://people.freebsd.org/~perky/ctypesinteg-f1.diff.bz2
>> [2] http://people.freebsd.org/~perky/ctypesinteg-f2.diff.bz2
>> I implemented it in two flavors.  [1] runs libffi's configure along with
>> Python's and setup.py just builds it.  And [2] has no change to
>> Python's configure and setup.py runs libffi configure and builds it.
>> And both patches don't have things for documentations yet.

[Thomas Heller]

> My plan is to make separate ctypes releases for 2.3 and 2.4, even after
> it is integrated into Python 2.5, so it seems [2] would be better - it
> must be possible to build ctypes without Python.
> As I said before, docs need still to be written.  I think content is
> more important than markup, so I'm writing in rest, it can be converted
> to latex later.  I expect that writing the docs will show quite some
> edges that need to be cleaned up - that should certainly be done before
> the first 2.5 release.
> Also I want to make a few releases before declaring the 1.0 version.
> This does not mean that I'm against integrating it right now.

"Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> writes:

> Not sure whether you think you need further approval: if you are ready
> to check this into the Python trunk, just go ahead. As I said, I would
> prefer if what is checked in is a literal copy of the ctypes CVS (as
> far as reasonable).

I was not looking for further approval, I wanted to explain why I prefer
the patch [2] that Hye-Shik posted above.

I'll do at least one separate ctypes release before checking this into
the Python trunk.



More information about the Python-Dev mailing list