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

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

On 8/20/06, Allen Bierbaum <al...@vr...> wrote:
> Roman Yakovenko wrote:
> > 1. It is an open source project with very open license
>
> Agreed.  This isn't an issue though.  The question comes down to one of
> will people be using and supporting the pypp_api or are the module
> builder interface and the classes of pyplusplus going to be promoted as
> the user-level API.

Py++ API is going to be promoted as the user-level API

> >
> > 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.
>
> We have discussed it before, but the goals for pypp_api really sum it up
> well for me.
>
> https://realityforge.vrsource.org/view/PyppApi/PyppGoals

In order to get results from this discussion, please right few reasons
why Py++ API is
bad and why pypp_api is good

> >> 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?
>
> I don't think it is a bug, it is just a changing API.

What is it?

Allen, please I need details without details this discussion is
meaningless. Sorry.

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