Jim Bosch wrote:
> On 03/14/2013 06:12 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
>> I'm expecting a numpy.random.RandomState object to be passed to me. I want
>> to
>> check it is. The best I could think of is below. Anything more
>> boost::python- ish to do this task?
>>
>> static object rs_obj;
>>
>> template
>
On 03/14/2013 06:12 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
I'm expecting a numpy.random.RandomState object to be passed to me. I want to
check it is. The best I could think of is below. Anything more boost::python-
ish to do this task?
static object rs_obj;
template
struct engine {
typedef out_type resul
I'm expecting a numpy.random.RandomState object to be passed to me. I want to
check it is. The best I could think of is below. Anything more boost::python-
ish to do this task?
static object rs_obj;
template
struct engine {
typedef out_type result_type;
bp::object rs;// Ra
On 01/27/2013 05:02 AM, Michael Wild wrote:
Hi all
Is there a way to apply a CallPolicy to operator definitions? In
particular, I'm interested in the inplace operators (+=, -=, *=, /= and
friends).
To give a bit more context: The library I'm trying to wrap exposes some
static const objects. So
On 03/08/2013 07:49 AM, Александров Петр wrote:
I have the C++ method which resize boost::numeric::array:
void solve(const TReal start_t, const TReal end_t, boost::python::numeric::array
&result) {
...
result.resize(make_tuple(...));
...
}
and this method is called from Python:
(this is a very late reply, but hopefully it will still be useful)
Your patch looks fine to me, but I'm not really sure who is responsible for
approving patches and committing them to the Boost.Python codebase these days.
I suspect the procedure for doing so is a little bit in flux, as boost i
