Re: [Rdkit-devel] RDKit Python wrappers

I expect the technical reason is that the boost wrapping was done well in advance of the swig. Having used both, I think that boost wrappers are far more pythonic, compile faster, do docstrings better and finally handle exceptions between c++ and Python far better. The downside is that when

Re: [Rdkit-devel] RDKit Python wrappers

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 7:09 PM, Brian Kelley wrote: > Having used both, I think that boost wrappers are far more pythonic, compile > faster, do docstrings better and finally handle exceptions between c++ and > Python far better. > > The downside is that when you get a

Re: [Rdkit-devel] RDKit Python wrappers

Ok, I'm convinced. I assumed there was probably a good reason, but sometimes it's worth asking the question just in case. I'm not anti boost, but, as with many of their libraries I have looked at, I found the documentation impenetrable at first reading. I will persevere. Cheers, Dave On Thu, 1

Re: [Rdkit-devel] RDKit Python wrappers

My two cents:- Brian got the big one: boost allows you to produce pythonic bindings and, as long as you're doing them at the same time you are writing the original code it's not that big of a deal to write the wrappers by hand.- Back when I started this SWIG was a complete disaster in terms of

Re: [Rdkit-devel] RDKit Python wrappers

You can always just ask... On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:14 PM +0100, "David Cosgrove" wrote: Ok, I'm convinced. I assumed there was probably a good reason, but sometimes it's worth asking the question just in case. I'm not anti boost, but, as with many