LLNL C++ as base for Python 2?
Have we been talking about Python 2 or Python 1.6? If we're talking about Python 2, has anyone given a serious look at the LLNL gang's C++/Python stuff? If I recall Paul Dubois' talk at the last conference, it sounded like their work made it much easier to implement extension modules.
Skip Montanaro | Mojam: "Uniting the World of Music" http://www.mojam.com/ skip@mojam.com | Musi-Cal: http://www.musi-cal.com/ 518-372-5583
Have we been talking about Python 2 or Python 1.6? If we're talking about Python 2, has anyone given a serious look at the LLNL gang's C++/Python stuff? If I recall Paul Dubois' talk at the last conference, it sounded like their work made it much easier to implement extension modules.
I've mostly had 1.6 in mind. See recent traffic in the C++ SIG archives for the status of Paul's CXX.
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Have we been talking about Python 2 or Python 1.6? If we're talking about Python 2, has anyone given a serious look at the LLNL gang's C++/Python stuff? If I recall Paul Dubois' talk at the last conference, it sounded like their work made it much easier to implement extension modules.
I've mostly had 1.6 in mind. See recent traffic in the C++ SIG archives for the status of Paul's CXX.
Recent traffic? There's nothing in there that's substantive since... uh, well, I got tired of looking back. =)
CXX is very cool, but it is still pushing the envelope of many C++ compilers. From what I gather, recent egcs' do manage with it, and since egcs is going to replace gcc, I expect that many platforms will be able to "do" CXX relatively soon.
I vote to stay on the 1.6 track for now.
participants (3)
-
David Ascher -
Guido van Rossum -
skip＠mojam.com