Hello,just the last good bye to everyone ;)
--
Trigve
On Monday, June 2, 2025 at 07:19:35 PM GMT+2, Jim Bosch via Cplusplus-sig
wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 9:23 AM Stefan Seefeld wrote:
I agree, but leave it to the list maintainer(s) to take any final decision.
I'll a
59 without issue.
>>
>> If someone on this list could take a look at this change, I'd
>> appreciate it. Let me know if you have any questions.
>
>I have merged the PR, and will try to get it into master for the 1.61
>release. Sorry this t
be shame
not incorporate the useful stuff in boost.python.
>
>Best,
>Wenzel
>___
>Cplusplus-sig mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
>
>
--
Trigve
___
>
> From: Tony Cappellini
>To: [email protected]
>Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 10:27 PM
>Subject: [C++-sig] Returning C++ buffer to Python 2.7
>
>
>
>
>
>I've allocated memory in C++ and need to expose a function to Python
>so that Python can read this
>
> From: Francesco Biscani
>To: Development of Python/C++ integration
>Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2015 4:00 PM
>Subject: Re: [C++-sig] Boost.Python docs update
>
>
>
>Kudos and thanks a lot, that looks great! (and it must have taken a lot of
>effort...)
>
>
;
>Could anyone confirm this? I provided a minimal, full working example.
>
>
>I would like to make sure it is a bug before reporting it as one.
>
>
>Christoff
>
What about making the Factory and Manufacturer class as noncopyable (and also
exportin
onvenience utility that adds a __copy__ or
>> __deepcopy__ method, but given the semantic subtlety, I think trying
>> to do it automatically is dicey.
>
> That's a fair point.
>
I agree with Alex Mohr. Adding some mechanism of implementing the copy using
copy constructor would be welcome. But doing it automatically wouldn't be ok. I
think that explicit is better than implicit.
Trigve
___
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
- Original Message -
> From: Jason Addison
> To: [email protected]
> Cc:
> Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 6:05 PM
> Subject: [C++-sig] Returning values to Python in C++ reference arguments
>
> How can results be returned in function arguments?
>
I don't think that you can retur
it possible that you are using debug version of your extension?
* If you are using VS, have you installed VC redist of *your's VS version* on
target PC?
Also try depends.exe to find if you aren't missing any dependencies.
> Thanks a lot,
> Ronny
Trigve
___
BOOST_PYTHON_MODULE(main)
> { class_("Base", init<>())
> .def("func", &Wrap::func) ;
> }
struct BaseClass
{
void func() {}
};
struct Wrap
{
static void func(BaseClass &Instance)
{
Instance.func();
}
};
BOOST_PYTHON_MODULE(main)
{
d want to know if it is
UB or not:
struct BaseClass
{ void func() {}
}; struct Wrap
{ static void func(BaseClass &Instance) { Instance.func(); }
}; BOOST_PYTHON_MODULE(main)
{ class_("Base", init<>()) .def("func", &Wrap::func) ;
}
> From: Jim Bosch
> To: [email protected]
> Cc:
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 12:28 AM
> Subject: Re: [C++-sig] C++ clas with (*args, **kwargs) constructor
>
> On 06/21/2012 06:07 PM, Trigve Siver wrote:
>>> From: Jim Bosch
>>> To: cplusplus-sig@
> From: Holger Brandsmeier
> To: Trigve Siver ; Development of Python/C++ integration
>
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 11:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [C++-sig] C++ clas with (*args, **kwargs) constructor
>
>T rigve,
>
> with the line
>
> class_>(&q
> From: Jim Bosch
> To: [email protected]
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 11:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [C++-sig] C++ clas with (*args, **kwargs) constructor
>
> On 06/21/2012 05:31 PM, Trigve Siver wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>> I'm tryi
> From: Trigve Siver
> To: Development of Python/C++ integration
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 11:31 PM
> Subject: [C++-sig] C++ clas with (*args, **kwargs) constructor
>
> ...
> then in main:
> ...
> try {
> object main = import("
I think because it finds only default constructor. I've tried
also raw_constructor from
http://wiki.python.org/moin/boost.python/HowTo#A.22Raw.22_constructor but
without success.
Anyone know if it is somehow possible?
Thanks
Trigve
___
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
ds,
>> Ta,
>> Avi
>
> There's no explicit support for it, no.
>
> Sorry,
But I think you could implement it like this:
class_(...) .def("__enter__", &somefunc)
.def("__exit__", &someotherfunc)
;
Trigve
___
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
n't routinely exercised.
> Overlooked incompatibilities are possible.
> I only have time to maintain the python2 support. We need a
> volunteer to port the unit tests to python3.
> Ralf
>
I'm testing release branch against python 3 (see Trigve in
http://www.boost.org
python
3.1.
I've created ticket https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4701 with patch.
Could anyone look at this?
Thanks
Trigve
___
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
omebody look at it?
Thanks
Trigve
___
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
s configuration work? Could be there some problems with boost.python
when using multiple threads?
Thanks
Trigve
___
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
Trigve yahoo.com> writes:
>
> Hi,
> I've got problem with embedded python. When using some classes inside embedded
> python...
Sorry,
It looks like it is not python fault.
Trigve
___
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
Cplusplus
ssion
{
boost::shared_ptr m_pImpl;
...
};
So as you can see when the destructor is not called appropriate times, the
shared_ptr isn't destroyed. I've tried searching but no working solution was
found.
thanks
Trigve
___
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
23 matches
Mail list logo
