[C++-sig] Announcing pybindgen
hans_meine at gmx.net
Wed Sep 26 15:36:31 CEST 2007
On Mittwoch 26 September 2007, Gustavo Carneiro wrote:
> Although I like Py++ a lot, I really hate Boost.Python.
Alarm! Wrong list! ;-P
> Maybe it's because
> of my lack of skill in understanding C++ templates, but I feel like
> Boost.Python hides too many details underneath a layer of cryptic to follow
> set of C++ templates, while I need to see the generated code in order to
> check that memory management details are being declared and implemented
That's a matter of trust. I like boost::python's memory management concepts a
lot. But you are right, that it is very difficult to look behind the scenes.
You should not have to, but if you want, it's really... scary. ;-)
(I am often giving up quite early when I see all the preprocessor magic with
#includes of #define'd files that recursively include the current header
> In addition, to compile Boost.Python based bindings your users
> need to have the boost python library and header files installed.
That's a real disadvantage indeed. If you happen to work on a very small
project that you want to offer to the world with Python bindings included,
boost::python is a rather large and inconvenient dependency.
> In contrast, PyBindGen generated extensions only require python development
> header files in order to compile, nothing more.
That's cool, but it's a pity that it does not have something like py++, based
> I also think Boost.Pythonextensions compile to rather large modules...
My experience is only with wrapping highly templatized code, thus I don't know
if that should be attributed to boost::python.
Ciao, / / .o.
/ / ANS ooo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the Cplusplus-sig