@jacob.small Could you provide a bit more context regarding the conversation, if possible?
This is a question we discussed for pyRevit. Plenty of discussion, actually. And no clear end.
The new pythonNET3 Autodesk, you guys are making, seems an interesting way, while this development is in a closed source.
The purpose of this thread here is for me to gather opinions about the move to support a single sustainable engine in pyRevit
If not, I recommend you do. It’s about as thorough an outline of the ‘why’ we can give, in a very well organized and structured format. I can’t imagine giving much more non-technical information than this to anyone ‘outside the factory’ so to speak, and what we have ‘in the factory’ is too hard to digest easily - you’d spend three months finding, collating, and consolidating everything if you came in cold from the exterior.
Do you have any direct links to the conversations you’ve had around the single engine efforts? Parsing the forum links you provided (perhaps everything was an automatically generated link?) mostly turns up discussion around implementing work arounds for particular tasks (i.e. the great post on WPF), but I don’t see any discussion or analysis on the pros and cons of each engine (IronPython, CPython, PythonNet, etc.).
Beyond that, if you want to get more into the technical stuff around ‘how’ an implementation was built, I’m likely not the best person to chat with - I will tag @solamour and @trygve.wastvedt to see if they have anything that they can share.
