Re: [C++-sig] [boost] [Python] GSoC and Python 3.0 Support
On 13 Mar 2009 at 12:10, David Abrahams wrote: > On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Stefan Seefeld > wrote: > > > I'm willing to participate, in particular, if other folks such as > > > > David, I notice you already indicated support. Could we team up for > > this ? > > Sure, I'd be glad to Would it make sense if Dave acted as second as in "person we fall back upon if the primaries can't figure it out?" Mentoring would cost any of us at least five hours per week, and definitely more than that some weeks and less other weeks. I'm just very lucky that this summer I have that kind of time spare for the first time in years. Cheers, Niall ___ Cplusplus-sig mailing list Cplusplus-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
Re: [C++-sig] [boost] [Python] GSoC and Python 3.0 Support
On Mar 14, 2009, at 4:28 AM, Niall Douglas wrote: On 13 Mar 2009 at 12:10, David Abrahams wrote: On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Stefan Seefeld wrote: I'm willing to participate, in particular, if other folks such as David, I notice you already indicated support. Could we team up for this ? Sure, I'd be glad to Would it make sense if Dave acted as second as in "person we fall back upon if the primaries can't figure it out?" That would make plenty of sense to me. I'd be very happy to have others leading the mentoring effort. But we may have missed the GSoC application deadline by now. I'm not sure whether anyone signed us up. -- David Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://boostpro.com ___ Cplusplus-sig mailing list Cplusplus-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
Re: [C++-sig] [boost] [Python] GSoC and Python 3.0 Support
> >> On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Stefan Seefeld > >> wrote: > >> > >>> I'm willing to participate, in particular, if other folks such as > >>> > >>> David, I notice you already indicated support. Could we team up for > >>> this ? > >> > >> Sure, I'd be glad to > > > > Would it make sense if Dave acted as second as in "person we fall > > back upon if the primaries can't figure it out?" > > That would make plenty of sense to me. I'd be very happy to have > others leading the mentoring effort. But we may have missed the GSoC > application deadline by now. I'm not sure whether anyone signed us up. Troy and me did. No response from Google yet, though. Regards Hartmut ___ Cplusplus-sig mailing list Cplusplus-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
Re: [C++-sig] [boost] [Python] GSoC and Python 3.0 Support
David Abrahams wrote: On Mar 14, 2009, at 4:28 AM, Niall Douglas wrote: Would it make sense if Dave acted as second as in "person we fall back upon if the primaries can't figure it out?" That would make plenty of sense to me. I'd be very happy to have others leading the mentoring effort. But we may have missed the GSoC application deadline by now. I'm not sure whether anyone signed us up. I believe we are on track. And I agree, too: It might be wise if people like Niall and myself did the official mentoring, while being able to relay questions we can't answer on our own to David. This could become a productive summer for boost.python ! Thanks, Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin... ___ Cplusplus-sig mailing list Cplusplus-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
Re: [C++-sig] Boost.Python app keeps crashing in debug
On Feb 22, 2009, at 7:23 AM, Martin Walser wrote: Okay... I found the problem. I used the opportunity to upgrade all my libs. Built Python 2.6.1 debug and release from sources... Downloaded Boost 1.38.0... And as I built Python myself this time, autodetection of python failed when building the Boost.Python libs. So I needed a Jam File. And there was the problem. You REALLY seem to need a Jam file to build the real debug versions. Doubtful, at least if the usual registry entries are set or you've installed in the standard locations. Otherwise, e.g. if you installed in C:\Python-2.6.1 and moved it to C:\libs\Python-2.6.1, then yeah, you might need to tell the system where your Python is. Properties like off can be added on the command line with, e.g., "python-debugging=off" define=BOOST_ALL_NO_LIB shouldn't be needed, but I'm totally willing to believe Boost.Python has bugs in that area. I put a "user-config.jam" in my home path (Windows: ECHO %HOMEDRIVE%%HOMEPATH%) and suddenly I got a working dll: user-config.jam ### using python : 2.6 # Version : C:\\libs\\Python-2.6.1\\python.exe# Python Path : C:\\libs\\Python-2.6.1\\Include # include path(s) - they may be not really needed here : C:\\libs\\Python-2.6.1\\libs # lib path(s) - they may be not really needed here : off ; using python : 2.6 # Version : C:\\libs\\Python-2.6.1\\python_d.exe # Python Path : C:\\libs\\Python-2.6.1\\Include # include path(s) - they may be not really needed here : C:\\libs\\Python-2.6.1\\libs # lib path(s) - they may be not really needed here : on BOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 ; It seems to be absolutely necessary to define on in the jam file. Simply invoking... bjam toolset=msvc --verbose-test test python-debugging=on define=BOOST_ALL_NO_LIB ...won't do the trick. Well, that's news to me. If that's the case, I'd say it's a Boost.Build bug that you should take up on the boost-build list. -- David Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://boostpro.com ___ Cplusplus-sig mailing list Cplusplus-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
