Python setuptools can create a source distribution:
python setup.py sdist # create a source distribution (tarball, zip file, etc.)
Or a binary distribution:
python setup.py bdist # create a built (binary) distribution
As far as I understand, there should not be any performance difference:
bdist installs the already-compiled .pyc files from the binary package.sdist compiles the .py files to .pyc files, and installs them.When executed it should not matter how were the .pyc files compiled - they should have the same performance.
Is there any performance difference between dist and sdist python packages?
If you have a pure Python code, the difference in time deploying will be slim. Note that there is no difference in performance between .py and .pyc, except that the latter will be read slightly faster the first time. The so called optimised .pyo only strip the asserts, and optionally, get rid of the docstrings, so they are not very much optimised.
The big difference comes when you have C files. sdist will include them if properly referenced, but the user will need a working and appropiate compiler, Python header files, and so on. Also, you will have to take the time to build them on every client. The same distribution will be valid for any platform you deploy in.
On the other hand, bdist compiles the code once. Installing in the client is immediate, as they don't need to build anything, and easier as they don't require a compiler installed. The downside is that you have to build for that platform. Setuptools is capable of doing cross-compilation, provided you have installed and configured the right tools.
Collected from the Internet
Please contact [email protected] to delete if infringement.
Comments