[C++-sig] Boost.Python code generator
nicodemus at globalite.com.br
Thu Dec 5 04:19:52 CET 2002
David Abrahams wrote:
>Why invent such radical new syntax? It's neither C++-like nor
> virtual void foo(int);
Because it would break the C++ syntax in other cases. The simple "def"
would have to change too, since now the user has to declare types:
The user would now have to write:
void bar(int x, double y, float z);
To maintain consistency.
Also, I want to add some other directives, like for example "rename",
which lets the user rename a function. How do that in a syntax similar
void bar(int x); rename MyBar;
Seems weird, most likely to confuse.
void bar(int x); // rename MyBar
would be better, maybe.
My idea is to include in the interface *only* the minimum that boost
needs to generate the wrapper code. Using a different and consistent
interface, seems to me a good idea in this case.
But the objective of my post is to discuss the idea... the
interface-file syntax is not definite, and will likely change.
More information about the Cplusplus-sig