Question on the development of Boost Python
I've read a recent post by Jim Bosch saying that the original developers of Boost Python are not going to upgrade it for supporting C++11 standard libraries. So I simply would like to understand if this great library is going to die or if it is kept up to date by someone else. Who are the current maintainers/developers? Jim, are you one of the official developers (I ask because I've not found your name into the Boost Python documentation)? Thank you in advance. Best regards. -- Michele De Stefano Web Site <http://www.micheledestefano.joomlafree.it> Linked In <http://it.linkedin.com/in/micheledestefano> mds-utils: a general purpose Open Source library<http://code.google.com/p/mds-utils> <http://it.linkedin.com/in/micheledestefano>
On 05/13/2012 05:18 AM, Michele De Stefano wrote:
I've read a recent post by Jim Bosch saying that the original developers of Boost Python are not going to upgrade it for supporting C++11 standard libraries.
So I simply would like to understand if this great library is going to die or if it is kept up to date by someone else.
Who are the current maintainers/developers?
Jim, are you one of the official developers (I ask because I've not found your name into the Boost Python documentation)?
I'm not, and my assertion about their plans should be read as just an observation by someone who has been paying attention to the mailing list and codebase. My sense is that critical errors and bugs are still being fixed, but there aren't many...and while patches are still being accepted when contributed, no one is really orchestrating development of new features. But I'm hoping someone more authoritative will chime in on that subject. A while ago I started some conversations about working on a major overhaul (i.e. a Boost.Python v3). I got a lot of useful ideas, and I'm been working on it since - but that's been proceeding extremely slowly due to other commitments. And it's turning into enough of a rewrite (I'm leaning towards making it a C++11 only library) that it's probably best to decouple those plans from improvements to the Boost.Python we have now. Jim
On 05/13/2012 05:18 AM, Michele De Stefano wrote:
I've read a recent post by Jim Bosch saying that the original developers of Boost Python are not going to upgrade it for supporting C++11 standard libraries.
Can you elaborate a little on what you mean by "supporting C++ 11" ? Specifically, in what way is it not supported right now ?
So I simply would like to understand if this great library is going to die or if it is kept up to date by someone else.
Implying that it is "going to die" simply because it isn't changed to support C++ 11 features is quite a stretch, don't you think ? How many compilers exist right now that fully support C++ 11 ? And how many users exist who are willing to switch at this point in time ? Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
I'm sorry, I understand that with my argumentation I've given the wrong idea of what I meant. I read that post from Jim Bosch and I thought he knew something more about Boost Python development. Then I completely agree that a library is absolutely not dead also if it does not support C++ 11. Personally, I won't be able to use C++ 11 for years starting from now. I would simply like to be re-ensured that Boost Python development is going on, because I like this library a lot. Best regards to all. Michele 2012/5/13 Stefan Seefeld <stefan@seefeld.name>
On 05/13/2012 05:18 AM, Michele De Stefano wrote:
I've read a recent post by Jim Bosch saying that the original developers of Boost Python are not going to upgrade it for supporting C++11 standard libraries.
Can you elaborate a little on what you mean by "supporting C++ 11" ? Specifically, in what way is it not supported right now ?
So I simply would like to understand if this great library is going to die or if it is kept up to date by someone else.
Implying that it is "going to die" simply because it isn't changed to support C++ 11 features is quite a stretch, don't you think ?
How many compilers exist right now that fully support C++ 11 ? And how many users exist who are willing to switch at this point in time ?
Stefan
--
...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
_______________________________________________ Cplusplus-sig mailing list Cplusplus-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
-- Michele De Stefano Web Site <http://www.micheledestefano.joomlafree.it> Linked In <http://it.linkedin.com/in/micheledestefano> mds-utils: a general purpose Open Source library<http://code.google.com/p/mds-utils> <http://it.linkedin.com/in/micheledestefano>
On 13 May 2012 at 21:28, Michele De Stefano wrote:
I read that post from Jim Bosch and I thought he knew something more about Boost Python development.
What Jim didn't mention is how BPL v2 (the current version) was first written. Basically, Berkeley paid Dave Abrahams a chunk of money to (re)write it and others have since bolted on extras, fixed bugs etc. But Dave designed and wrote the core. Dave, needing to put bread on the table, has to choose to only code where he is paid for it. If someone stumps up the cash to substantially improve BPL, I don't doubt Dave will be only too happy to fix all sorts of things in BPL. There is a long list of known issues in BPL. Unfortunately, the number of complainants (and I include myself here) on this mailing list has never matched the willingness to front cash or personal time to fix them. That's not a criticism, it's just how open source works.
I would simply like to be re-ensured that Boost Python development is going on, because I like this library a lot.
The best way to ensure that Boost Python development goes on is to send a few thousand dollars per year to Dave and/or Boost Consulting for maintenance. Unfortunately, as far as I am aware, no one has done so for Boost Python in some years now which is a great shame as bitrot has definitely set into BPL. In the end though, if it's really important enough to people, someone will eventually either stump up cash or do the rennovations themselves. Niall -- Technology & Consulting Services - ned Productions Limited. http://www.nedproductions.biz/. VAT reg: IE 9708311Q. Work Portfolio: http://careers.stackoverflow.com/nialldouglas/
On 13 May 2012 at 14:31, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
On 05/13/2012 05:18 AM, Michele De Stefano wrote:
I've read a recent post by Jim Bosch saying that the original developers of Boost Python are not going to upgrade it for supporting C++11 standard libraries.
Can you elaborate a little on what you mean by "supporting C++ 11" ? Specifically, in what way is it not supported right now ?
Feeding some forms of code using C++11 into BPL would cause it to choke.
So I simply would like to understand if this great library is going to die or if it is kept up to date by someone else.
Implying that it is "going to die" simply because it isn't changed to support C++ 11 features is quite a stretch, don't you think ?
"Bitrot" is a more appropriate term.
How many compilers exist right now that fully support C++ 11 ? And how many users exist who are willing to switch at this point in time ?
I've been using bits of C++11 in my own code since 2004 :) yes, they were all #ifdef'd out according to a compiler environment test, but I wrote in support for rvalue refs from the very beginning. It was extremely pleasing when the very first GCC to support rvalues became available and I could finally compile that code (needless to say, none of it worked as the spec had changed). A lot of users are using small bits of C++11 in their C++. Variadic templates alone just make things so very much faster, and static assertions are a boon as is noexcept instead of throw(). I personally don't use the new container iteration for loop construct yet, but I am liking the new use of the auto keyword in the old form contaner iteration loop. My point is that no one ever switches. Rather, conveniences creep in, and less people raise bugs when an older compiler no longer compiles. One day everyone is no longer targeting the old standard. It doesn't mean, of course, that they're targeting the new standard either :) Niall -- Technology & Consulting Services - ned Productions Limited. http://www.nedproductions.biz/. VAT reg: IE 9708311Q. Work Portfolio: http://careers.stackoverflow.com/nialldouglas/
participants (4)
-
Jim Bosch -
Michele De Stefano -
Niall Douglas -
Stefan Seefeld