On Apr 3, 2009, at 4:49 PM, Danilo Freitas wrote: > So, I think one thing I need to change, is that instead of creating a > template syntax, I'll work on improving an already existing syntax > right?
Probably, yes. > And so that it should be useful all templates (including STL)? > > And should I also work on those ohter problems? I'm afraid of putting > many things on proposal, and don't finish it in time. :/ As expected, this could turn into a huge wishlist of things that would be nice to have, certainly not all feasible for a GSoC project :). I would say (1) Being able to wrap templated code (2) Polyomorphic functions would be the priorities, and allow a nearly full wrapping of STL. If time permits (3) operator overloading (we have this for Python classes of course, but to allow the + operator, etc. to be used for declared C++ classes) would be good to. > 2009/4/3 Stefan Behnel <[email protected]>: >> >> Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote: >>> [some interesting stuff that doesn't currently work (easily) in >>> Cython] >> >> Are these examples in the Wiki somewhere? Would be great to have a >> page >> that just lists stuff that's non-trivial in current Cython and needs >> improvement. That makes it easier to focus on those problems that >> bring the >> best relieve. >> >> Stefan >> _______________________________________________ >> Cython-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > Cython-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
