[C++-sig] approaching a new library
Leonardo Rochael Almeida
leo at hiper.com.br
Wed Aug 21 02:39:10 CEST 2002
Dang, I changed the subject just to send an e-mail that doesn't match
I meant (but forgot) to ask, do you guys have suggestions regarding how
to approach a large C++ library with the intent of creating Boost.Python
bindings for it? any war stories :-)? Since we will be in a position to
influence changes in the library itself, do you have any suggestions in
that area? What can a C++ library author do to make it easier to make
Boost.Python bindings for it?
On Tue, 2002-08-20 at 19:43, Leonardo Rochael Almeida wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-08-20 at 17:08, David Abrahams wrote:
> > [...]
> > However, if you haven't got very far into v1 I'd like to strongly suggest
> > you try using v2.
> > The docs, though not yet complete, are probably better and more complete in
> > the formal sense than those for v1. Though there's no tutorial section,
> > there's a lot of reference documentation which covers most of the important
> > stuff. Also, v1 is going to be retired (very) soon. Furthermore, v2 is just
> > better in nearly every way. One major problem with v1 is that it won't
> > build on conforming compilers.
> It was working for me, AFAIK, with a gcc-3.0 toolchain on Linux (Debian
> and Mandrake), but have it working on Windows is a pretty important
> goal, which we haven't tested yet.
> My only fear is, since there isn't any released tarball of it yet, that
> v2 would be a moving target, making it hard to use it for development.
> but since "you strongly suggest" it, it probably means that grabbing it
> from cvs will be stable enough :-)
> I'll try it tonight
> Cheers, Leo
> Ideas don't stay in some minds very long because they don't like
> solitary confinement.
> C++-sig mailing list
> C++-sig at python.org
Ideas don't stay in some minds very long because they don't like
More information about the Cplusplus-sig