Use extension_name instead of module_name for CFFI extensions in develop mode #1476
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
✅ Deploy Preview for maturin-guide ready!Built without sensitive environment variables
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings. |
messense
approved these changes
Feb 12, 2023
|
bors r+ |
|
I'll backport this to v0.14 and release a new version soon. |
|
Build succeeded: |
|
I was looking at the project history and just noticed this PR is the CFFI equivalent of #1416. Mostly commenting to link both PRs =] |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I noticed when running
maturin developwith sourmash that the CFFI extension ended insrc/sourmash/sourmashinstead of the expectedsrc/sourmash/_lowlevel.py(to match the[package.maturin.metadata.name]field).maturin buildputs the extension in the right place, so checking how it worked I noticed that changing the line from this PR would make the behavior match indevelopandbuild.(and now I'm opening a PR to see if I missed some test and I'm breaking other use cases 😬 )