You can always just ask...
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:14 PM +0100, "David Cosgrove" <davidacosgrov...@gmail.com> 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 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
