RE: [Boost-users] Re: Bad interaction between boost::bindandBoost.Python?
-----Original Message----- From: David Abrahams [mailto:dave@boost-consulting.com] Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 8:24 AM To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: [Boost-users] Re: Bad interaction between boost::bindandBoost.Python?
In principle your boost/python header has to be #included first [before boost/bind] anyway, at least if you intend your code to run on POSIX.
[Nat] ? I don't understand why that would be? Shouldn't each header #include everything to make it self-sufficient, rather than depending on the includer's prior #includes?
All I can suggest is that you try the latest Boost CVS state, which doesn't have this problem. A new release of Boost is imminent anyway.
[Nat] That's fair, and thanks for testing it. But given the amount of time I've spent so far on this 1.31.0 upgrade, I'm going to lay low for a few days before announcing that I intend to upgrade to yet another version of Boost... ;-)
"Nat Goodspeed" <ngoodspeed@solidworks.com> writes:
-----Original Message----- From: David Abrahams [mailto:dave@boost-consulting.com] Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 8:24 AM To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: [Boost-users] Re: Bad interaction between boost::bindandBoost.Python?
In principle your boost/python header has to be #included first [before boost/bind] anyway, at least if you intend your code to run on POSIX.
[Nat] ? I don't understand why that would be? Shouldn't each header #include everything to make it self-sufficient, rather than depending on the includer's prior #includes?
It's not that. Python imposes the restriction that Python.h must be included before any system header so it can set some configuration macros, probably because POSIX requires it. Boost.Python needs to get in and wrap Python.h, ergo... -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
participants (2)
-
David Abrahams -
Nat Goodspeed