Re: [boost] Re: boost.python warning on tru64cxx65 (was Re: name mangling scheme for tru64cxx65)

From: Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve (rwgk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-31 20:00:32

--- Markus_Schöpflin <markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve wrote:
> 
> > I just started a local test run after inserting #include <pyconfig.h> at
> the
> > beginning of prefix.hpp. It will take a few hours before I have all
> results.
> 
> Do you suggest that adding <pyconfig.h> to prefix.hpp instead of 
> wrap_python.hpp would be the way to go?

It seems most natural to me, but it's really a matter of taste I guess.

The tests are going well. Only one platform is not yet completely done (a
really old SGI). The newer SGI compiler (7.41) had a hick-up. <complex> has to
be included before pyconfig.h to avoid hard errors. I'll look at this some more
ASAP. Maybe this one exception to the "pyconfig.h first" rule can be avoided
somehow.

> > Boost.Python Version 2 requires Python 2.2 or greater anyway.
> 
> What about a check in this file, then? Something like
> 
> #if PY_MAJOR_VERSION<2 || PY_MAJOR_VERSION==2 && PY_MINOR_VERSION<2
> #error ...
> #endif

Yes, that looks like a good idea to me. I'll include it in my patched version
of wrap_python.hpp.

> > I think we should eliminate this complicated construct.
> 
> It was taken from further down the file. That should go as well, then.

Yes, I've locally removed both instances.

Ralf

                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail