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 Dec 2016 at 20:03, Maciek Wójcikowski <mac...@wojcikowski.pl> wrote: > One big thing on pros side: boost::python supports serialization natively, > and SWIG does not. > > ---- > Pozdrawiam, | Best regards, > Maciek Wójcikowski > mac...@wojcikowski.pl > > 2016-12-01 20:46 GMT+01:00 Gianluca Sforna <gia...@gmail.com>: > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 7:09 PM, Brian Kelley <fustiga...@gmail.com> 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 compile error, it is several pages > long. > > While we are at this, I stumbled few days ago on this project: > > https://github.com/pybind/pybind11 > > That claims to work mostly like boost::python, just without the boost part. > > If we were to try removing the boost dependency, I think it could be > useful. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Rdkit-devel mailing list > Rdkit-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rdkit-devel > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Rdkit-devel mailing list > Rdkit-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rdkit-devel >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Rdkit-devel mailing list Rdkit-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rdkit-devel
