Re: Use of boost.python. was: RE: Response to ROOT criticism?

Wim,
> > If I wanted scriptable use, I'd probably write a Python wrapper using
> > Boost.Python.
>
> the unfortunate bit is that, even though there are major shortcomings and
> missing functionality, development on boost.python has stopped back in
> 2003.

Just my 2 cents: Boost.Python is more or less to be replaced by Boost.Langbinding which is meant to provide bindings to Python, Ruby, Lua,... But, development is not at a steady pace.

>
> > To imply that (ROOT) dictionaries are the *only* way is a
> > misrepresentation.
>
> A lot of effort has been put in different ways of providing bindings, with
> three main branches, so it is possible to make a well-founded comparison.
> As is, the dictionary based approach wins hands down in terms of
> performance, functionality, and ease of use. No, it's not the only way,
> but, short of FFI, it's the best way.

Cheers,
Sebastien.

-- 
###################################
# Sebastien Binet                 #
# Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. #
# 1 Cyclotron Road                #
# Berkeley, CA 94720              #
###################################