Fredrik Lundh wrote: > "Pat"wrote: > > > I thought I was being as clear and specific as I needed to be. > > Apparently not. I'm talking about compiling the original source code > > the python source or the extension source? > > > The bottom line is that compiling C extension modules > > would indicate the latter. setup.py handles that just fine, if you have the > right tools. no pain at all. > > > Now, if you know something I don't, I'm all ears. But I don't see how > > your suggestion solves my problem. > > if your problem is compiling C extension modules, I suggest getting a > good compiler. I've done that, and compiling C extension modules is > no problem at all. > > if your problem is that you don't want to use a good compiler, or that > your company cannot afford to buy you a compiler, or you have other > reasons to chose the "pain in the ass" way over the "it just works" way, > I'm afraid I cannot help you. my time's too precious to waste on inferior > tools.
Okay, I think we are pretty much talking about the same thing. My problem is not that I'm unable or unwilling to purchase a good compiler. My problem is that I don't want to make it a requirement of my users. The twist is that my users will be working out of a Subversion repository that includes source code for extensions written in C. Those extensions need to be compiled, and the code changes too frequently for me to want to deal with supplying compiled binaries. So I'm looking for options for Windows users who do not have, and are unwilling to get, a Microsoft compiler. For some users, minGW is an attractive option. For those who want to use minGW, I'm trying to establish whether or not minGW is a viable option, particularly for Python 2.4. I was under the impression that there were possible advantages to compiling Python itself using minGW, but that that required some patches that hadn't been applied to Python (for reasons unknown to me). Said patches are available here: http://jove.prohosting.com/iwave/ipython/pyMinGW.html I'm also under the impression that there are possible disadvantages to compiling Python itself with anything other than the Microsoft's optimizing compiler, such as performance. But I haven't seen any numbers on that, so I don't have information one way or the other. It may also be the case that minGW can now correctly compile extension that link to the newer runtime used by Python 2.4, but that wasn't always the case. If that's true, that would eliminate the primary reason for wanting to compile Python itself with minGW, though philosophical differences with MS might motivate some to want to avoid the MS compilers altogether. Perhaps the only thing that's a mess is my understanding of the situation. But even if that's the case, I don't think I'm alone, based on all the threads I've read over the past couple of days. ;-) Thanks in advance for any help anyone can offer to reduce my confusion. Patrick K. O'Brien Orbtech http://www.orbtech.com Schevo http://www.schevo.org Pypersyst http://www.pypersyst.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
