Re: [matplotlib-devel] Experiments in removing/replacing PyCXX

[Benjamin R. <ben...@ou...>]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Nathaniel Smith <nj...@po...> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:40 PM, Michiel de Hoon <mjl...@ya...>
> wrote:
> > One package (Pysam) that I use a lot relies on Cython, and requires
> users to install Cython before they can install Pysam itself. With Cython,
> is that always the case? Will all users need to install Cython? Or is it
> sufficient if only matplotlib developers install Cython?
>
> You can set things up so that end-users don't have to install cython.
> You just convert the .pyx files to regular .c files before
> distributing your package. Numpy itself uses cython, but end-users
> don't notice or care. (It's something more of a hassle for developers
> to do things this way, and cython is very easy to install, so I don't
> know if it's worth it. But it's certainly possible.)
>
>
Since when has numpy used Cython?  I specifically remember a rather
involved discussion thread on numpy-discussion about the pros-and-cons of
including cython.  Now, SciPy on the other hand, does utilize Cython in
some spots IIRC, but does it in a way that it isn't even required for the
developers to have cython installed to build from source.

I would not be against such an approach.  Much of the C/C++ stuff is rarely
touched.  If we have some source cython that is used to generate C/C++
source code that is packaged in the same way as the current code is, I
would have no problem with that.  Given that matplotlib is such a
fundamental tool in the ecosystem, I want to make sure that the decisions
we make are ones that improves our packaging situation.

Cheers!
Ben Root