Re: [C++-sig] strange behavior with respect to numeric and Booleanoverloads

2009-03-19 Thread troy d. straszheim
Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve wrote: The comprehensive solution sounds like a project. Do we have someone to work on this? I'm asking because I think Troy's proposed simple solution is better than the status quo. I'm willing to work on it. I'd have to look at Daniel W's code to see if I want t

Re: [C++-sig] Some thoughts on py3k support

2009-03-19 Thread Hans Meine
On Donnerstag 19 März 2009, Matthew Scouten (TT) wrote: > Ok, Fine. But I want the ability to specify an encoding ONCE and have > use that unless I change it or override a specific conversion. I would want such a thing, too. (Assuming that all 8-bit strings *do* use the same encoding, which will

Re: [C++-sig] Some thoughts on py3k support

2009-03-19 Thread Niall Douglas
On 19 Mar 2009 at 21:53, Haoyu Bai wrote: > This naming style is a bit more clear but broken user's build scripts > - not a big problem though. But when all the Python community evolved > to py3k, and 2.x come into history, should we change the name back > from libboost_python_py3.so to libboost_p

Re: [C++-sig] Some thoughts on py3k support

2009-03-19 Thread Niall Douglas
On 20 Mar 2009 at 0:20, Haoyu Bai wrote: > Yes unicode string can't faster than raw string. However one can use > the bytes object while regarding to performance. I took from reading the py3k docs that strings are now always held internally as utf-8? On that assumption I proposed the treating o

Re: [C++-sig] Some thoughts on py3k support

2009-03-19 Thread Matthew Scouten (TT)
Ok, Fine. But I want the ability to specify an encoding ONCE and have use that unless I change it or override a specific conversion. I also want there to be a reasonable default so that if I forget to specify anything, it will work for the majority of cases. -Original Message- From: cpl

Re: [C++-sig] Some thoughts on py3k support

2009-03-19 Thread Hans Meine
On Thursday 19 March 2009 09:02:35 Haoyu Bai wrote: > By default we would use PyUnicode_AsUTF8String(), and encoding could > be explicitly specified by a converter policy. That may keep most of > your code compatible. Please do *not* hard-code UTF-8. At least, if you need to guess a default, use

Re: [C++-sig] strange behavior with respect to numeric and Booleanoverloads

2009-03-19 Thread Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve
The comprehensive solution sounds like a project. Do we have someone to work on this? I'm asking because I think Troy's proposed simple solution is better than the status quo. - Original Message From: David Abrahams To: Development of Python/C++ integration Sent: Wednesday, March

Re: [C++-sig] Some thoughts on py3k support

2009-03-19 Thread Haoyu Bai
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve wrote: > >> Of course the default converter policy we planed is not to convert to > >> raw data buffer from unicode object via PyUnicode_AS_DATA(). The C-API >> such as PyUnicode_AsUTF8String() and PyUnicode_AsEncodedString() will >> be us

Re: [C++-sig] Some thoughts on py3k support

2009-03-19 Thread Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve
> Of course the default converter policy we planed is not to convert to > raw data buffer from unicode object via PyUnicode_AS_DATA(). The C-API > such as PyUnicode_AsUTF8String() and PyUnicode_AsEncodedString() will > be used to convert unicode to bytes and then convert to char* and > passed to

[C++-sig] pyplusplus (pygccxml) bug: enumeration class

2009-03-19 Thread Christian Andreetta
Hi all! Noob question: I'm not familiar with neither boost.python nor with the python c-api, so I tried pyplusplus on a stl library I need to interface from python (this library is quite a good example of templating, casting and overloading, and I would rather avoid doing it manually ;) ) Issue: r

[C++-sig] Protected virtual Functions with default implementation

2009-03-19 Thread Renato Araujo
Hi guys, I'm working again in my bindings generation and I get a new question about virtual functions. I would like to know how export protected virtual functions with default implementation, because I didn't find any documentation about this and the code generated by Py++ not work in all cases.

Re: [C++-sig] Some thoughts on py3k support

2009-03-19 Thread Stefan Seefeld
Haoyu Bai wrote: This naming style is a bit more clear but broken user's build scripts - not a big problem though. But when all the Python community evolved to py3k, and 2.x come into history, should we change the name back from libboost_python_py3.so to libboost_python.so? Can we postpone

Re: [C++-sig] Some thoughts on py3k support

2009-03-19 Thread Haoyu Bai
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Niall Douglas wrote: > On 18 Mar 2009 at 2:07, Haoyu Bai wrote: > > I'd prefer a slightly different naming convention for the eventual > case when Boost.Python itself bumps a version. How about this: > > libboost_python_py2.so > libboost_python_py3.so > > I'd also

Re: [C++-sig] Some thoughts on py3k support

2009-03-19 Thread Haoyu Bai
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 6:40 AM, Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve wrote: > > I tried the code below with Python 2.x. For a given str or unicode object, it > copies the > bytes in memory (char*) to a list of 1-character strings. I'm getting > > "hello" =  ['h', 'e', 'l', 'l', 'o'] > u"hello" =  ['h', '\x0