Embedded Perl or Python (XPost)

Chris rebel at removethis.rebel.com.au
Sat Sep 6 07:23:49 CEST 2003


thanks for the heads up on Boost

I have just downloaded Swig and am beginning to explore that, So boost 
also sounds like a good idea.

I think with my penchant for small things I may be getting carried away.

I guess suck it and see is my best option, I have explored the source 
code for perl 5.8 and got considerably lost :( 

I will have to try python and see if I come out any wiser


Alex Martelli <aleax at aleax.it> wrote in
news:g_Y5b.25276$R32.778757 at news2.tin.it: 

> Chris wrote:
>    ...
>> So if I call vfunction(); and an add on has been written that
>> redefines this function (and possibly calls the base c++ function)
>> that it is called correctly.
>> I have chosen perl and python as my preferred languages because of
>> the large developer base for add ons
>> The interpreter will only have a subset of the standard funtionality,
>> for example sockets will be removed.
>> Given the above which interpreter is most likely to fit my bill with
>> the smallest footprint ?
> No idea about "footprint", partly because it so crucially depends on
> what you will or won't remove.  But trying it out for benchmark and
> measurement is trivially easy for Python -- use Boost Python, which
> you get from www.boost.org, and the "subclassing C++ in Python with
> the possibility of overriding virtual functions" functionality is
> there. 
> Assuming it's just as easy for Perl (sorry, no idea), trying it for
> both languages and measuring footprint should fit comfortably within
> an afternoon with ample time left over for tea;-).
> Alex

More information about the Python-list mailing list