Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Best python binding library

This topic is 5042 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Hi I''ve done some embedding of Python in C++ before using the native C interface and it''s a case of "been there, done that, don''t want to do it again." I''m currently looking at SWIG or BOOST as a wrapper to make things nicer, and I''ve also heard of something called "ppembed" which I can''t find much about (I think it was given out with some O''Reilly book or other). I''m looking for recommendations, and what are the strength and weaknesses of the various wrappers? My needs are fairly basic. I''ve got a few classes with functions that I want to be able to access from Python scripts, and I''ve got some Python functions that I want to access from C++. Class member access isn''t essential (I can do that through functions). It needs to be cross-platform and work with GCC/Dev-C++. Native C++ would be helpful, but not at all essential. I''d prefer not to have to run the code through a preprocessor if possible, but I''m probably going to have to live with that. I''m not looking for an ultra-high-level solution here, just something to make embedding Python a little less god-awful. What do you reckon? Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A lot of people say positive things about the Boost system, providing they can get it to compile. There are a couple of other links in the Forum FAQ so you might take a look at any documentation while you''re waiting for other opinions.

[ MSVC Fixes | STL Docs | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost
Asking Questions | Organising code files | My stuff | Tiny XML | STLPort]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Kylotan
A lot of people say positive things about the Boost system, providing they can get it to compile.


Boost 1.31 claims "a simpler build procedure" for boost::python


“Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.”
— Brian W. Kernighan (C programming language co-inventor)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Fruny
Boost 1.31 claims "a simpler build procedure" for boost::python


that is, if you have VC.net.. i couldnt get it to compile with vc6. I really should think about investing in a new compiler. :|

that aside, the build process is simpler than 1.30 but not by much



[edited by - syrillix on February 24, 2004 6:12:37 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites