On 03/02/2011 11:48 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn, 02.03.2011 11:20:
c) Somehow provide more than one module in the same compilation unit.
Again, this requires the build to work correctly, but seems less
dangerous,
and also has the advantage of *allowing* static linking of the Fortran
library, if one wants to.
But is something like this possible? Could one implement
cython -o assembly.c file1.pyx file2.pyx file3.pyx
...where assembly.so would contain three Python modules? (initfile1,
initfile2, and so on...)
Can't currently work because the three modules would define the same
static C names. This could be fixed as part of the PEP 3121
implementation:
http://trac.cython.org/cython_trac/ticket/173
Or it could be worked around by overriding the prefixes in Naming.py
(which sounds ugly).
Generally speaking, I'm -1 on this idea. I don't see a real use case,
and you're saying yourself that this isn't required to make your
Fortran use case work either.
But assuming work is spent on Cython, it *could* work? I.e. there's not
a problem with import mechanisms; Python assumes one module per .so or
similar? Or would one have to write a custom importer?
- If you build the Fortran code as a static library (rather common...),
then each pyx file will have their own copy. This will link successfully
but likely have a rather poor effect.
So? lxml has two main modules, and if you build it statically against
libxml2/libxslt, you end up with two static versions of that library
in the two modules. Takes up some additional space, but otherwise
works beautifully.
Problem is that Fortran code often has...interesting...programming
practices. Global variables abound, and are often initialised between
modules. Imagine:
settings_mod.set_alpha(0.34)
print compute_mod.get_alpha_squared()
This behaves quite differently with two static versions rather than one...
Dag Sverre
_______________________________________________
cython-devel mailing list
cython-devel@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
