Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Dynamically loading Python library

Expand Messages
  • Panos
    I was pestering Bjorn about making python be dynamically loaded, but I went ahead a compiled from source. Easy as pie, plus now I have python 2.5 support :)
    Message 1 of 15 , Nov 4, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I was pestering Bjorn about making python be dynamically loaded, but I
      went ahead a compiled from source. Easy as pie, plus now I have python
      2.5 support :)

      Thanks for making it that easy, although I still believe that people
      that actually use python are way past 2.3 by now.

      Still it's easier to have them compile it themselves, than to ask them
      to move up a version of their OS, so I see why we're having this
      issue.

      It should be made easier to pick python version depending on the build
      platform, hope we can figure this out.

      On Nov 4, 12:17 pm, Ben Schmidt <mail_ben_schm...@...> wrote:
      > Nico Weber wrote:
      > >>> It seems this is the only way to go then.  But...I wonder if it  
      > >>> really
      > >>> is worth my time making two distributions just so a few users get to
      > >>> use Python 2.5 instead of 2.3.  I think I need a better reason than
      > >>> that for something as drastic as distributing two different versions
      > >>> of the binary.  Maybe I underestimate the number of users who would
      > >>> benefit from 2.5, but for now I'll just keep building with 2.3.  :-/
      >
      > > That sounds reasonable.
      >
      > +1.
      >
      > Real Python-heads can always compile themselves.
      >
      > >> What about feature freezing the current 10.4 version and continuing
      > >> development for 10.5 only?  Then you could enable garbage collection
      > >> which would be much more convenient for development -- this issue bugs
      > >> me especially because if someone wants to make a plugin, I'm pretty
      > >> sure they can't use garbage collection since MacVim doesn't.
      >
      > > I don't use Tiger, but I don't think dropping Tiger already is a good  
      > > idea (see e.g.http://update.omnigroup.com/).
      >
      > I agree, but I do use Tiger. 10.4.9. :-)
      >
      > Ben.
      --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
      You received this message from the "vim_mac" maillist.
      For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
      -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
    • björn
      ... Jason, feel free to make your own builds available -- I have no objections to this. (Sorry for taking so long to reply to your post!) Björn
      Message 2 of 15 , Nov 7, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        2008/11/3 Jason Foreman <jason@...>:
        >
        > FWIW, I've been toying with the idea of making my own Leopard-only
        > builds available recently. I always build my MacVim from source using
        > Python 2.5 and 10.5 SDK. I do also use a couple of extra patches in
        > my build (relative number, Lua, working on vimgdb). If there is
        > interest, I could put my builds up somewhere for others to use. My
        > main concern would be increasing the support load due to unofficial
        > builds floating around.

        Jason, feel free to make your own builds available -- I have no
        objections to this.

        (Sorry for taking so long to reply to your post!)

        Björn

        --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
        You received this message from the "vim_mac" maillist.
        For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
        -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.