Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.005 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:Python': 0.05; 'python': 0.08; 'machines.': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'subject:modules': 0.09; 'from:addr:behnel.de': 0.16; 'from:addr:stefan_ml': 0.16; 'from:name:stefan behnel': 0.16; 'received:188.174': 0.16; 'received:mnet-online.de': 0.16; 'subject: \n ': 0.16; 'subject:which': 0.16; 'subject:Windows': 0.17; 'shipped': 0.18; 'memory': 0.21; "doesn't": 0.22; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.22; 'stefan': 0.24; 'writes:': 0.25; 'windows': 0.26; 'bit': 0.28; "i'm": 0.28; 'compile': 0.29; 'installing': 0.29; 'cases.': 0.30; 'i/o': 0.30; 'tool.': 0.30; 'installation': 0.30; 'pretty': 0.31; 'subject:?': 0.31; 'version': 0.32; 'certainly': 0.32; "won't": 0.33; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.33; 'file': 0.34; 'header:X -Complaints-To:1': 0.34; 'running': 0.34; 'operations': 0.35; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.35; 'received:org': 0.36; 'but': 0.37; 'using': 0.37; 'mass': 0.38; 'data': 0.38; 'processing': 0.39; 'received:de': 0.39; 'subject: (': 0.40; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'our': 0.63; 'limit': 0.67; 'received:188': 0.68; 'serious': 0.78; 'advantages': 0.80; 'bach,': 0.84; 'gcc?': 0.84; 'induces': 0.84 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: Stefan Behnel Subject: Re: Compiling Python (modules) on 64bit Windows - which compiler suite? Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 08:06:17 +0100 References: <808abad4-3ab3-4336-8a31-2f88eb28be01@v22g2000vby.googlegroups.com> <874nthu68q.fsf@jubold.box> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-188-174-40-245.dynamic.mnet-online.de User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120310 Thunderbird/11.0 In-Reply-To: <874nthu68q.fsf@jubold.box> X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 19 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1332399996 news.xs4all.nl 6977 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:44917 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:22009 Thomas Bach, 21.03.2012 20:03: > Ralph Heinkel writes: >> when processing our mass spectrometry data we are running against the >> 2GB memory limit on our 32 bit machines. So we are planning to move to >> 64bit. Downloading and installing the 64bit version of Python for >> Windows is trivial, but how do we compile our own C extension? > > What about installing Cygwin and using the shipped GCC? I'm pretty sure it doesn't cross compile to native Windows. It certainly won't build against a native Windows Python installation, and given the overhead that cygwin induces into a lot of common OS operations (such as fork(), I/O operations or file system access), a native Windows Python installation has serious advantages in most cases. If the choice is GCC, then MinGW is the right tool. Stefan