From: John H. <jd...@gm...> - 2008-06-06 17:37:56
|
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Christopher Burns <cb...@be...> wrote: > I'm sure that would work, but John's make target 'build_osx105' is > much easier, particularly for end users. > > $ make build_osx105 > > That's it. Unpythonic in it's appearance, but sets the required > CFLAGS and calls setup.py. What Charlie is saying is my solution will result in a slower mpl than his, since my solution uses a lower optimization level for all files, and he uses the lower level only on the problematic files. But the make solution has the advantage of being a one step automatic build, and I'm not looking for great performance on my laptop usually... JDH |