dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 09:26:55PM +0200, Johan Hoffman wrote:
> >
> >
> > Ola Skavhaug wrote:
> >> This is general comment on installation of the DOLFIN interface. No
> >> doubt, the
> >> header files define the interface to DOLFIN. These files are installed
> >> somewhere, and we have tools (like pkg-config) to find out how to use
> >> the
> >> interface (locate, compile, link). Additionally, I will argue that the
> >> SWIG
> >> interface files also belong to the DOLFIN interface. For a user to
> >> extend
> >> DOLFIN, and then expose these extensions to Python such that the type
> >> information is correct, the SWIG interface files are needed. In SWIG, to
> >> propagate type information correctly between separate modules, the
> >> %import-directive must be used _on the interface files_. Since these
> >> interface
> >> files are currently not considered part of the interface, we have no
> >> tools
> >> (like pkg-config) to resolve the location, or swig-options, of the
> >> Python
> >> interface.
> >>
> >> I therefore suggest that we add the swig-interface files when installing
> >> DOLFIN. The simplest solution is to install the files the same place as
> >> the
> >> header files (relatively to the source layout), since the interface
> >> files use
> >> relative %include. I.e.:
> >>
> >> $PREFIX/include/dolfin/swig/*.i
> >>
> >> Comments and objections are welcome.
> >>
> >
> > Sounds reasonable to me as a swig non-expert.
> >
> 
> Do we still have the option to -disable-swig/PyDolfin? From previous
> discussions it seems that this is desirable since it may complicate the
> build process for strict C++ users.

I guess enablePydolfin=no should work.

-- 
Anders