StaticTuple... naming, maintenance, ...

[Alexander Belchenko]

John Arbash Meinel пишет:
> So I mentioned in an old thread, but I have a branch here:
>   lp:~jameinel/bzr/2.1-static-tuple

> 3) C/Cython/Pyrex

>     I would *really* like to switch to Cython 0.11+, as I have specific
>     benefits. One could argue that we could try to be compatible, and
>     people can compile using Pyrex, and just wouldn't get the memory and
>     speed improvement of avoiding the GC...
> 
>     I'm also using stuff like 'cpdef' and 'inline', but I can work
>     around those things easily enough. I can't hack the 'HAVE_GC' flag
>     easily.

Some notes.

I've pointed out in the past that Cython generates the code which cannot be compiled by MSVC
compiler, only by gcc (mingw) on Windows. It's not problem per se, because official installer built
with mingw. And as long as this C-extension will be optional this should not blocks custom bzr.exe
builds. Perhaps I'm the one crazy guy who built custom bzr.exe in the past. Now with new advanced
installer I can drop it.

And as long as you will build bzr.exe based on Python 2.5 I'll be happy to not build my custom
bzr.exe anymore and don't think about incompatibility with MSVC.

So don't count my note as objection, just as observation. I don't want to block anything that good
for you and bzr project.

But if you won't switch bzr.exe from Python 2.5 to 2.6 then you'll make one crazy guy pretty happy.