Re: [jamboost] Re: Python initialization in V2

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-14 02:18:58

On Friday 11 February 2005 19:19, David Abrahams wrote:

> > The 'python-extension' rule must arrange for Boost.Python
> > to be linked with the created python extension.
>
> Well the Boost.Python library isn't required for all Python
> extensions; just the ones built with, er, Boost.Python ;-)

In V1, "python-extension" creates Boost.Python extension ;-)

> > I see two approaches
> > to find Boost.Python
> >
> > - Just grep relatively to BOOST_BUILD_PATH, like boostbook does
> >
> > - Allows the user specify explicit location.
> >
> > I think it's best to allow both approaches:
> >
> > # Tries to find Boost.Python form BOOST_BUILD_PATH
> > using python : 2.3 ;
> >
> > # Explicit 'using bpl' specifies the location of Boost.Python
> > using python : 2.3 ;
> > using bpl : /home/ghost/Work/boost/libs/python ;
> >
> > Comments?
>
> I'm highly confused. Why isn't bpl just like any other library?
>
> You just use the standard ways of referring to either prebuilt or
> project-based libraries. No?

It's possible, but might not be desirable. There are two approaches:

1.

python-extension getting_started :
getting_started.cpp /boost/python//boost_python ;

2. 

python-extension getting_started :
getting_started.cpp ;

In the first case, you explicitly specify the location of Boost.Python. In the 
second case, it's implicitly added by the 'python-extension' rule (and must 
be configured previously).

The second approach is more user-friendly, IMO. What do you think?

- Volodya