Well, whereas SIP looks at SIP files (a stone's throw from the C++ header file) and generates C++ bindings, I could imagine it wouldn't be *extremely* painful to write a utility like SIP to generate Boost code from the headers, or a slightly modified version thereof, instead. Not saying I'm going to write it myself :), but the point was only that the limitation doesn't lie with Boost itself.
The bigger issue re: Qt/KDE is that I have no idea how you'd handle the signal/slot mechanism without having preknowledge about it, like SIP does. Fred On Thursday 13 March 2003 10:00 pm, Jim Bublitz wrote: > I've looked at it (and argued with David Abrams on comp.lang.python > a little) but never tried it. Boost has some advantages over sip, > especially if you only want to bind a few functions, have a lot of > templates, or like writing C++. The drawbacks (in the context of > of a large project like PyKDE anyway) is that it requires a lot of > handwritten code, more knowledge of what the code actually does, > looks difficult to automate, and would be difficult to maintain over > a number of versions (right now PyQt supports everything from Qt1.42 > onward, and PyKDE supports KDE 2.1.1 onward, each with a single > file set). Can't say as far as performance, but it seems like Boost > should be pretty fast and perhaps a little smaller in binary size. -- F R E D E R I C K P O L G A R D Y J R. Bodacion Technologies 18-3 E Dundee Road - Suite 300 - Barrington, IL 60010 Phone: 847/842.9008 - Fax: 847/842-1731 Web: http://www.bodacion.com _______________________________________________ PyKDE mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
