[C++-sig] Re: Boost.Python: few thoughts and questions... [PATCH]

David Abrahams dave at boost-consulting.com
Sat Jun 14 11:52:21 CEST 2003

Roman Sulzhyk <roman_sulzhyk at yahoo.com> writes:

> Guys:
> Anyway, here's a patch with some rather raw hacks so far, if this
> functionality is useful to Nicodemus I can definitely clean this up.
> The patch is against stock 1.3.0 pyste.
> Basically I've added 'unvirtual' functionality, to treat virtual
> functions as if they were regular

Strange name, though.  Does "final" have the wrong connotations?

> added policy honouring to virtual member functions and extended the
> member function generation to include all of the functions publicly
> inherited from base classes.
> BTW, I also have a few questions, maybe we can have a discussion:
> 1) Is it worthwhile to add a 'default reference policy' to pyste, i.e.
> a default conversion (like copy_const_reference) which will be used in
> case one isn't specified explicitely. This will be useful for
> situations where one has an API which returns a bunch of const
> std::string &, to avoid having to specify them function by function.

I think it might be worthwhile having that *per type*, so that you
can say "when std::string is returned by const&, just copy it".

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

More information about the Cplusplus-sig mailing list