Re: [PyOpenGL-Users] OPENGL

[Thomas H. <th...@ct...>]

Greg Ewing schrieb:
> Mike C. Fletcher wrote:
>> Actually, ctypes is quite slow compared to e.g. SWIG.  That's because it 
>> does a lot more work at run-time for every call than a SWIG or similar 
>> system does.  OpenGL-ctypes (PyOpenGL) is even slower because it has to 
>> provide the array and similar semantics that aren't available in ctypes' 
>> core.
> 
> This is a little worrying, as OpenGL calls are something you
> really don't want being inefficient. I'm hoping this is more
> of a theoretical than practical concern. Has anyone done any
> measurements?

Andrew Dalke as written two nice articles about ctypes that I know of:

http://www.dalkescientific.com/writings/NBN/ctypes.html
http://www.dalkescientific.com/writings/NBN/c_extensions.html

The latter has some comparisons between ctypes and a C-coded
extension.

Thomas