Scripting C++ -- Boost.Python vs CORBA vs ???

[Craig Maloney]

Thanks Dave.  You raise some issues that've been puzzling me.

  rasmussn at lanl.gov has been good enough to bring the lanl SILOON
project to my attention.

http://www.acl.lanl.gov/siloon/

David Abrahams wrote:

> "Craig Maloney" <cmaloney at physics.ucsb.edu> wrote in message
> news:3C7283E4.4050604 at physics.ucsb.edu...
> 
> 
> One of the design goals for Boost.Python was to avoid the language support
> issues that tend to plague systems which attempt to parse C++. Parsing C++
> is hard; AFAIK all of the wrapping systems which try to do it break down in
> some areas. Boost.Python uses the builtin type inference abilities of your
> C++ compiler instead of parsing the C++ code separately.

 > [...]

 

As I understand it, the SILOON project uses a commercial parser known as
PDT from uoregon.  Have you, or has anyone else had any experience with 
the SILOON/PDT project?  On the face of it, my guess would be that you 
would be somewhat skeptical of their claims?

As for the CERN Root interpereter (CINT) 
http://root.cern.ch/root/Cint.html -- which I had already heard about 
from my friends in the know in the particle physics community -- I 
would assume that many here also harbor the same skeptecism toward the 
C++ interpereter as they do toward the C++ parsing systems?


Cheers,
Craig