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). 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 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? It does not seem like a practical thing to do--but maybe I'm missing something...? Thank you. Michael D.