Re: [C++-sig] Linking issues with Boost.Python 1.69.0, Python 2.7, MSVC 14.0

2019-03-27 Thread Stefan Ring
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 3:27 PM Sarah Rust wrote: > > Hello! > > I have been trying to build and link the latest Boost.Python to work with > Python 2.7 and my Visual Studio 2015 project (MSVC 14.0) with x64 > configuration. I've added the Boost library and Boost include directory to my > projec

[C++-sig] Linking issues with Boost.Python 1.69.0, Python 2.7, MSVC 14.0

2019-03-26 Thread Sarah Rust
Hello! I have been trying to build and link the latest Boost.Python to work with Python 2.7 and my Visual Studio 2015 project (MSVC 14.0) with x64 configuration. I've added the Boost library and Boost include directory to my project's properties, but I am getting the following error when I create

Re: [C++-sig] Linking issues with Boost.Python

2010-08-19 Thread David Aldrich
Hi Thanks for the replies. It seems that some people do have concerns about SCons. I think that CMake may be a better choice for us. We don't need the cross-platform capability but if CMake has more comprehensible configuration files and solves the #include dependency checking problem, that wo

Re: [C++-sig] Linking issues with Boost.Python

2010-08-19 Thread Niall Douglas
On 19 Aug 2010 at 14:10, Gustavo Carneiro wrote: > See also: WAF http://code.google.com/p/waf/ > > It is also in Python, but is a lot faster than scons. It has some usability > problems (but scons does have them too), but it's a pretty useful tool to > know... That is a very useful link indeed

Re: [C++-sig] Linking issues with Boost.Python

2010-08-19 Thread Gustavo Carneiro
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 18:02, Niall Douglas wrote: [...] > > As Nat said, bjam is the core of Boost Build but Boost adds a lot to > it. I've always found it lacking in configurability personally, and > like Nat I'm also not fond of its syntax either - much like CMake > too. I will say though that

Re: [C++-sig] Linking issues with Boost.Python

2010-08-18 Thread Niall Douglas
On 18 Aug 2010 at 15:32, David Aldrich wrote: > > I would strongly recommend that you use something more modern than > > GNU make. Boost's build system is much better. The one I use is scons > > (http://www.scons.org/) whose only main fault is O(N^2) scaling to > > source file number, a problem th

Re: [C++-sig] Linking issues with Boost.Python

2010-08-18 Thread Nat Goodspeed
David Aldrich wrote: I would strongly recommend that you use something more modern than GNU make. Boost's build system is much better. The one I use is scons (http://www.scons.org/) whose only main fault is O(N^2) scaling to source file number, a problem they are in the process of fixing. Shou

Re: [C++-sig] Linking issues with Boost.Python

2010-08-18 Thread David Aldrich
Hi Niall > I would strongly recommend that you use something more modern than > GNU make. Boost's build system is much better. The one I use is scons > (http://www.scons.org/) whose only main fault is O(N^2) scaling to > source file number, a problem they are in the process of fixing. I take your

Re: [C++-sig] Linking issues with Boost.Python

2010-08-18 Thread Niall Douglas
On 17 Aug 2010 at 14:20, David Aldrich wrote: > I would be grateful for some help with setting up some makefiles for my > C++ application, compiled with gcc under Linux, that uses Boost.Python. I would strongly recommend that you use something more modern than GNU make. Boost's build system is

[C++-sig] Linking issues with Boost.Python

2010-08-17 Thread David Aldrich
Hi I would be grateful for some help with setting up some makefiles for my C++ application, compiled with gcc under Linux, that uses Boost.Python. The application consists of a static library that contains main() and various shared libraries that are dynamically linked at runtime as required.