Use brotli with CPython, brotlicffi elsewhere #31
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
hartwork
approved these changes
Dec 20, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I found this verbatim at https://pypi.org/project/brotlicffi/#using-brotlicffi-in-projects , seems like a good move, I wish upstream would explain their reasoning. Did you find any or know the rationale for this?
|
I suppose the rationale is that there's no sense bridging with CFFI when a native CPython extension exists to do the job. |
|
Looks like this PR needs to be updated for current master. |
|
Ping |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Upstream recommends using the standard
brotlipackage with CPython, relying on the CFFI alternative only on other platforms. Changes in this PR follow these recommendations.