[pyicu-dev] setup.py? Eggs?
vajda at osafoundation.org
Mon Dec 5 10:04:31 PST 2005
> If this is the case, why not use the C API? IMO, this would have a
> couple of advantages:
> - More people would understand the code
It would be a different project. PyICU aims to wrap the ICU C++ API using
SWIG. Other approaches and other APIs could be used for sure, but the 'itch'
for me was to use SWIG to wrap the ICU C++ API.
- I like to learn new things. C++ is relatively new to me (C is not, of
- SWIG seems to make it relatively easy.
- the ICU C++ API seems richer, if I wrapped the C API instead, I'd have to
write a lot of python boilerplate to get classes out of it again.
> - You could combine the extensions into one.
That's unclear. I don't know that SWIG produces less source code, in other
words, less bloat, when wrapping C instead of C++. You probably have a point
here though since a lot of the bloat comes from overloaded methods, not a
feature of C. I still think that then, in order to support the same stuff, a
lot of that bloat would move to handwritten python boilerplate.
More information about the pyicu-dev