Re: [pygccxml-development] Future of pypp_api...

[Roman Y. <rom...@gm...>]

On 8/19/06, Allen Bierbaum <al...@vr...> wrote:
> What are the future plans of the pypp_api?
>
> I am in a very frustrating position because I am very happy with the
> capabilities and code generation abilities of pyplusplus, I have ported
> all my projects over to using it and am actively promoting it to
> others.  But I am not at all happy with the pyplusplus builder
> interface.  I have become frustrated enough with the pyplusplus builder
> API that I am starting to port my generation scripts over to using the
> pypp_api.  This API is definitely designed to be much more of a user API
> that just allows people to get work done.  I would highly suggest that
> anyone that wants to use pyplusplus to create bindings should be using
> this API.  It is simple and direct.  I am willing and interested in
> contributing more to it, but first I wanted to make sure it is going to
> continue to exist.

1. It is an open source project with very open license

2. I would like to get a list what you think is really bad in current
API and what
    is really good with pypp_api.

> I have already run into
> cases where changes to pyplusplus have broken my generation scripts and
> that is when I was using the pyplusplus builder API.

In most case, when I break API I have good reason. What is your case,
may be this
is a bug?

-- 
Roman Yakovenko
C++ Python language binding
http://www.language-binding.net/