"Drumheller, Michael"
This gmane entry <<http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.c++/9049/match=pyplusplus+m ature>> says, among other things, the following
"""If you can, use pyplusplus over pyste. I say that for ALL users of pyste, pyplusplus is now mature enough to be useful as well as being actively developed. It can also do quite a few tricks pyste cannot."""
If this is really the case, I think the Boost documentation needs to say so. For example, the doc page <http://www.boost.org/libs/python/pyste/> does not give any warning that Pyste is essentially deprecated (which it apparently is, if the above quote is true).
It may be deprecated by the author of that quote, but the author of the quote has no official standing.
Further, as far as I can tell there are no clues at <http://www.boost.org/libs/libraries.htm#Inter-language> indicating that users might want to check out pyplusplus, whereas the official Boost.Python page <http://www.boost.org/libs/python/doc/index.html> explicity directs users to Pyste.
The author of Pyplusplus has not proposed it as a replacement for Pyste in Boost.
The end result is that an innocent user who is new to integrating Python and C++ (like, um, say, me) could reasonably come away with the impression that the most state-of-the-art approach to use is Boost.Python+Pyste.
As a side question, does anyone use Boost.Python *without* an automatic code generator such as Pyste or Pyplusplus?
Yes, lots of people do.
It does not seem like a practical thing to do--but maybe I'm missing something...?
Why do you say that? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com