[C++-sig] pure class, to expose or not to expose?

Hello, I need help again. In the example below I either get the error message during compilation: > ... >/home/mihail/temporary/boost_1_37_0/boost/python/object/value_holder.hpp:66: >error: cannot declare field >‘boost::python::objects::value_holder::m_held’ to be of abstract type ‘A0’ >boost.cp

Re: [C++-sig] boost.python: implicit type conversion

> >implicitly_convertible(); > >implicitly_convertible(); > >} > I see that an int can be implicitly converted to X. But how can an X be > converted to an int? I can't believe that boost.python searches all > implemented > functions to find that make_x is capable of converting an int to

Re: [C++-sig] boost.python: implicit type conversion

> Roman Yakovenko wrote: > > It is not a good idea. Python string is immutable. May be you should > consider custom converter. > http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_37_0/libs/python/doc/v2/faq.html#custom_string I don't see why it is not a good idea. I am nowhere accessing any string derived classe

[C++-sig] boost.python: implicit type conversion

Dear all, thanks a lot for your immediate responses that lead to a fast solution for my previous problem. Here comes the next one. In the example below both classes A and B are derived from std::string. Class B can be implicitly converted to A by means of 'B::operator const A()'. So the functi

Re: [C++-sig] boost.python: private copy constructor problem

> try use boost::noncopyable to B or implemente a copy constructor in B > without call A copy contructor. Thank you. This works: BOOST_PYTHON_MODULE(boost_ext) { class_ a("A",init<>()); class_, boost::noncopyable >("B",init<>()); } One more question about the syntax. You cited http://ww

Re: [C++-sig] boost.python: private copy constructor problem

> Stefan Seefeld wrote: > > In this case you want to tell Python that your object is non-copyable: I followed your suggestion and still get the same error message: boost.cpp:6: error: ‘A::A(const A&)’ is private (full bjam output is appended to this email) Could you check this modified code? bo

Re: [C++-sig] boost.python: private copy constructor problem

Sorry, the public A::A() constructor was missing. The corrected class A, which caused the described problem, is: class A{ private: A(const A&){}; //no public copy constructor public: A(){}; }; ___ Cplusplus-sig mailing list Cplusplus-sig@

[C++-sig] boost.python: private copy constructor problem

Hello, I am still in the early process of learning boost.python. I have reduced my problem to the following code: #include using namespace boost::python; class A{ private: A(const A&){}; //no public copy constructor }; class B: public A{ public: B(){}; }; BOOST_PYTHON_MODULE(boost_ext) {

Re: [C++-sig] Pyste,Py++: equivalent of swig typemaps?

> If I understand right SWIG feature, it allows you to define something > like "call policy" which is invoked before and after function > invocation, and it also allows you to define complex mapping between > Python and C++ arguments. So you can define it once, and then apply it > when needed. Yes

Re: [C++-sig] Pyste,Py++: equivalent of swig typemaps?

AIL PROTECTED]> An: Development of Python/C++ integration Gesendet: Sonntag, den 30. November 2008, 20:29:41 Uhr Betreff: Re: [C++-sig] Pyste,Py++: equivalent of swig typemaps? Mihail Konstantinov wrote: > Hello, > due to limitations of swig I am currently learning Py++ and Pyste (because i

[C++-sig] Pyste,Py++: equivalent of swig typemaps?

Hello, due to limitations of swig I am currently learning Py++ and Pyste (because it seems currently to be better documented than Py++). Does Pyste or Py++ offer typemaps like swig (http://www.swig.org/Doc1.3/SWIGDocumentation.html#Python_nn53) that allow any sequence of input arguments to be wrap