On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:45, Matthieu Brucher<[email protected]> wrote:
> I don't think there is a chance of PySide using another toolbox. I'll > explain myself. > PySide uses Boost.Python, and thus has access to a complete excellent > parser (Spirit) and other tools to automate its build (it was proved > with Py++). The bindings generator and the bindings themselves are separate things. The bindings generator can use Boost all it likes for parsing and graph manipulations internally without using Boost.Python for the generated code. The PySide team is looking at other strategies for the generated code. There is a branch under weigh that uses just the Python C API. > Another point is that Cython generates C code, and not C++ > code. Boost and Qt are known to be C++ frameworks, and heavily rely on > this. If Cython cannot output C++ code, I don't know if it can compete > with Boost... Cython can output C++ code and wrap C++ libraries. However, I don't think it supports everything that Boost.Python does, particularly overriding virtual methods from the Python side. I doubt Cython would help them much over just using the Python C API, but it is a viable option. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
