[Scons-users] Scons on pypy

[Daniel Holth]

Of note is that modern versions of pip do not need 'setup.py install'.
Instead, they always build a wheel first, then install that.

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:58 AM Daniel Holth <dholth at gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't have it yet. I would be happy to trade information about the
> necessary commands and Python packaging metadata for SCons advice :)
>
> List of what pip invokes on setup.py
> https://pip.pypa.io/en/stable/reference/pip_install/#build-system-interface
>
> Here's an implementation of setup-requires (install requirements before
> running the bulk of setup.py). https://bitbucket.org/dholth/setup-requires Eventually
> a future version of pip will do this for you, and this will become a no-op
> shim.
>
> Here's an experimental waf script that builds a wheel for bdist_wheel
> itself, in a few lines of code.
> https://bitbucket.org/dholth/wheel/src/tip/wscript
>
> Wheel also has code to convert between old and new metadata formats.
>
> I haven't measured the impact of __slots__ on PyPy 5.1 very much except
> that it prevents it from working at all. You would have to work with the
> PyPy developers on that front. 'local-zip' uses more time and more memory
> on PyPy, but there may be better SCons benchmarks.
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:18 AM Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com> wrote:
>
>> I was hoping to clean up the setup.py file myself. I had hoped to make it
>> use whl files. I had hoped to test it with pypy myself.
>>
>>
>>
>> I was hoping to make it simpler like the one I define for a project I am
>> working on here:
>> https://bitbucket.org/dragon512/reusable-gold-testing-system/src/23db072a0d7469e777f8921ca6e7580894587da4/setup.py?fileviewer=file-view-default
>>
>>
>>
>> However we seem to have the expert here J Do you have a better setup.py
>> already, or should I still try to give it a shot and have you give it a
>> review?
>>
>>
>>
>> Also on the __slots__ issue with pypy. I had defined a test to show the
>> need for the node changes and posted it here some place. The use of
>> __slots__ or __slabs__ in pypy case shows values. I did the test with
>> ironpython, cpython 2 and 3 and pypy. All showed better use of memory. This
>> is critical for Scons to scale better for large build. As a side effect of
>> use less memory for the same information we get a speed boost as well, and
>> for a build system that is good, as user always complain that the “build is
>> slow”.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jason
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Scons-users [mailto:scons-users-bounces at scons.org] *On Behalf Of
>> *Daniel Holth
>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 5, 2016 1:00 PM
>> *To:* dl9obn at darc.de; SCons users mailing list <scons-users at scons.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-users] Scons on pypy
>>
>>
>>
>> I am the guy who invented wheel (*.whl) for Python packaging, and I am
>> interested in advancing Python packaging generally. I feel that a
>> setuptools monoculture holds us back generally, it hails from the late 90's
>> (distutils) and very few people understand how to extend it. SCons seems
>> like a nice way to experiment with a more flexible build system that is
>> written in Python and easily installed from pypi.
>>
>>
>>
>> Soon, pip will be able to install dependencies *before* it touches
>> setup.py. See
>> https://github.com/brettcannon/build-deps-pep/blob/master/pep-0NNN.rst.
>> Pip is also working on defining an interface (consisting of a few setup.py
>> commands) that it promises to use when invoking setup.py. That makes it
>> much easier to bring abstractions to setup.py and re-implement just the
>> parts that pip needs. So for any project that runs against the limitations
>> of distutils there should and can be other options.
>>
>>
>>
>> As it happens I also have a concrete project that does benefit from
>> SCons. The pysdl2-cffi binding to SDL2 is not particularly exceptional, but
>> it needs to automatically generate some *.py code to help wrap the SDL2
>> library before "setup.py bdist_wheel" can be called. It does this by
>> parsing SDL2's headers with a little compiler that generates a friendlier
>> wrapper compared to using cffi raw. It also calls cffi to generate *.c and
>> compiles that as an extension module (here, it is especially helpful to be
>> running under the target Python, to ask distutils for compiler options).
>> SCons is great at this because there are several build steps that depend on
>> each other's outputs. It would be difficult to do that efficiently with
>> distutils or setuptools.
>>
>>
>>
>> The other aspect I'm interested in is to implement bdist_wheel in SCons.
>> It should be much easier to prototype new features without having to deal
>> with distutils' and setuptools' baggage.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> Daniel Holth
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 12:11 PM Dirk Bächle <tshortik at gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> On 05.06.2016 14:55, Daniel Holth wrote:
>> > Simply I want to try using scons to implement setup.py. To do this I
>> need to have scons run on whatever versions of Python the
>> > package is compatible with, obviously. Then I need to write a task to
>> generate a couple of packaging metadata and archive formats.
>> >
>>
>> are we really talking about the setup.py from the setuptools? Do you
>> really want to re-implement it, but using SCons?
>> Please feel free to do so, I'm just wondering what the benefit of this
>> would be. I mean, for installing SCons on my system I'd need
>> to have the setuptools anyway...so what does your solution bring that
>> setuptools doesn't have? Just curious...
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Dirk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Scons-users mailing list
>> Scons-users at scons.org
>> https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Scons-users mailing list
>> Scons-users at scons.org
>> https://pairlist4.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-users
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist4.pair.net/pipermail/scons-users/attachments/20160606/d38c09a3/attachment.html>