From: Daniel Berlin (dan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-05-26 09:54:20
> > I looked at it, and I tried converting a few small pieces from CXX 4.2
> > sourceforge, Python-C++ connection) to your library, and yours is just
> > harder to use.
> !!! Man, that was fast !!!
> It's also strange. I've been in communication with Barry Scott, the CXX
> maintainer about this technology. He expressed great interest, in part
> because it seemed to make some things much easier. One big advantage over
> what's available in CXX is that you don't have to do manual function
> argument conversion.
Which i'm quite used to already.
> Another is that you can override your C++ class'
> virtual functions in Python.
Which i don't use.
> > Then again, I use CXX extensively inside our app (a
> > Development environment) to expose pieces to python,
> Cool! I've always thought that more applications should be scriptable. Now
> that I've found Python, I know *what* they should be scripted with.
People can't tell which parts are in python, and which are in C++ (I
frequently move C++ code into python for ease of maintenance reasons).
> > so maybe i'm just
> > biased having used it more.
> Maybe. Or maybe you were looking at the wrong part of the py_cpp code?
See, i have most of my objects already passable as python objects (IE they
derive from PythonType, and are thus real python objects), so i'm probably
just set in my ways.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk