I would take a tested and true solution sanctioned by CPython core devs any day over a novelty third party library that gets another language toolchain involved.
Also, the solution seems to only cover what’s possible with ctypes already. If don’t need the flexibility there’s little reason to hand roll an extension module. (Not saying ctypes doesn’t have its problems; e.g. when you pass in a wrong number of arguments instead of throwing a TypeError it segfaults.)
ctypes does not parse C headers and doesn't know about enums or function parameter types — only that they have a symbol in the .dynsym section of a .so.
Maybe you're thinking of cffi? Cffi does basically what this blog post covers, except without D. It requires a C compiler at some stage in the process, but you can pregenerate during 'build' phase and ship a header snapshot to avoid requiring the C compiler at runtime.
No, ctypes does not. It can't handle macros, and it requires users to define the structures in Python themselves. It's miles away from what's in the blog post.
Comments
I would take a tested and true solution sanctioned by CPython core devs any day over a novelty third party library that gets another language toolchain involved.
Also, the solution seems to only cover what’s possible with ctypes already. If don’t need the flexibility there’s little reason to hand roll an extension module. (Not saying ctypes doesn’t have its problems; e.g. when you pass in a wrong number of arguments instead of throwing a TypeError it segfaults.)
ctypes does not parse C headers and doesn't know about enums or function parameter types — only that they have a symbol in the .dynsym section of a .so.
Maybe you're thinking of cffi? Cffi does basically what this blog post covers, except without D. It requires a C compiler at some stage in the process, but you can pregenerate during 'build' phase and ship a header snapshot to avoid requiring the C compiler at runtime.
I didn’t say ctypes takes the same approach — I even mentioned ctypes’ shortcomings. I only said ctypes makes what this does possible already.
No, ctypes does not. It can't handle macros, and it requires users to define the structures in Python themselves. It's miles away from what's in the blog post.