Re: [boost] py_cpp

From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-10-18 13:27:15

----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Berlin" <dan_at_[hidden]>

> Okay, well, let me explain my point.
> My point is that most C++ applications of the future, or at least,
> robust, extensible C++ applications (IE non-super domain specific must
> run as fast as possible no exceptions are not what i'm talking about)
> , will not be written purely in
> C++. Already they aren't. They all have their own scripting languages,
> or use an existing one, and as time passes, more and more of the
> application tends to be moved into a scripting language, because it's
> a heck of a lot easier to work in.
> (Now when i say python here, you could substitute your favorite
> scripting language)
> Given this, things like Python *are* the way of the future for
> C++. Most of an application will be written in python, rather than
> C++. Or at least, a significant amount of them will be in python.
> Whether this takes 1 year, 2 years, or 5 years to become the norm,
> it's happening.
> Having py_cpp in boost helps us provide for this future, since it is
> the future of C++.

While I can't buy into Dan's point-of-view completely, I do believe it is
one of many valuable approaches to using C++. As Bjarne would say, there's
no "one true way" to use the language, but this approach is likely to become
increasingly prevalent as time goes on.

-Dave