Am 26.08.2011 um 20:25 schrieb Jim Bosch:
> - … the rvalue converters in particular don't seem to have been intended as
part of the public API originally, and I think they're an important part of
the library.
Correct, great!
> - Automatic conversions for newer boost libraries (Fusion, Pointer
On 08/26/2011 08:21 PM, Jim Bosch wrote:
> On 08/26/2011 04:47 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
>> The top of my list is improved interface to numpy. I know there is
>> work going
>> on in the form of ndarray, which seems promising.
>
> I'm still hesitant to consider ndarray part of Boost.Python; it's
> rea
On 08/26/2011 04:09 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
> on Thu Aug 25 2011, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
>> Jim,
>>
>> this is an interesting idea. There has been lots of general (dare I
>> say generic ?) discussion concerning process improvements (which
>> unfortunately most of the time diverted into tool discus
On 08/26/2011 04:47 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
The top of my list is improved interface to numpy. I know there is work going
on in the form of ndarray, which seems promising.
I'm still hesitant to consider ndarray part of Boost.Python; it's really
a separate library, and I think providing a full
The top of my list is improved interface to numpy. I know there is work going
on in the form of ndarray, which seems promising.
___
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
Cplusplus-sig@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
Trying to catch up here, so responding to everything all at once.
on Thu Aug 25 2011, Jim Bosch wrote:
Just how tall are you, Jimbo?
> I'd like to start work on a new major release of Boost.Python.
That certainly is welcome news.
> While the library is currently well-maintained in terms of
On 08/25/2011 04:26 PM, Ralf Grosse-Kunstleve wrote:
Hi Jim,
CC to Dave.
This is great news.
My main interests have been stability and not increasing the memory
footprint of boost.python extensions. I'm not in a position to further
develop boost.python.
Troy and Ravi have done a significant amo
On 08/26/2011 04:17 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
What sort of improvements did you have in mind?
My list includes:
- Propagating constness to Python (essentially already done as an
extension, but it could have a much nicer interface if I could mess with
class_ itself).
- Make custom registry and
On 08/26/2011 01:28 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> BTW, how has the Python3k port worked out? I'm not sure if it's been
> mainlined yet has it? Best of luck! Niall
I'm not using Python 3k myself, so I can't comment, but the P3K port
most definitely went into trunk and has been part of the last couple
On 25 Aug 2011 at 13:59, Jim Bosch wrote:
> - For other Boost.Python experts on this list: do you have existing code
> or development time you'd like to contribute?
Firstly, I must commend you as you're a better man than I for
initiating this. I mostly chase money these past few years, and I
d
On 08/26/2011 07:17 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
> What sort of improvements did you have in mind?
Two things on my list that are likely going to be somewhat disruptive are:
* Support for subclassing boost.python's own metaclass.
* A per-module type registry, to avoid conflicting converters in
multi-mo
What sort of improvements did you have in mind?
___
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
Cplusplus-sig@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
Hi Jim,
CC to Dave.
This is great news.
My main interests have been stability and not increasing the memory
footprint of boost.python extensions. I'm not in a position to further
develop boost.python.
Troy and Ravi have done a significant amount of work. I hope they will
comment for themselves.
I
On 08/25/2011 04:59 PM, Jim Bosch wrote:
>
> To that end, I'm inclined to copy the library to somewhere else
> (possibly the boost sandbox, but more likely a separate site), work on
> it, produce some minor releases, and re-submit it to Boost for review.
> Perhaps the external site would continue o
14 matches
Mail list logo
