Boost logo

Boost :

From: rwgk_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-07-18 20:44:28

--- In boost_at_y..., "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_r...> wrote:
> I think it is somewhat important. It means Python 2.2 is breaking
> compatibility on some existing code and limiting the flexibility of
> Boost.Python. It would be better if everything could be made to
continue to
> work.

Apparently it is Guido's goal not to break existing code in 2.2

> While the ultimate goal of PEP 253 is to do away with
> ExtensionClass, I believe that ExtensionClass should still
> work in 2.2, breaking it in 2.3.

What is the best way of communicating our findings to Guido?
How would you describe the problem in two sentences?

> On the other hand, perhaps it would be best if under Python 2.2,
> Boost.Python classes were just subtypes of built-in classes.
> That seems to
> be the whole point of that PEP.

Guido writes:
> However, you can create mix-in classes by inheriting from "object".
> This a new built-in, naming the featureless base type of all
> built-in types under the new system.

I am guessing that this is what we will have to use under
Python 2.3.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at