[Numpy-discussion] Add pybind11 to docs about writing binding code

[Sylvain Corlay]

Thanks guys.

If we add pybind11 and xtensor, boost.python is also a good contender there.

S.

On Mon, Aug 20, 2018, 11:51 Hans Dembinski <hans.dembinski at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Robert,
>
> > On 17. Aug 2018, at 23:44, Robert Kern <robert.kern at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Even if you don't use the numpy-mimicking parts of the xtensor API,
> xtensor-python is a probably a net improvement over pybind11 for
> communicating arrays back and forth across the C++/Python boundary. Even if
> the rest of your C++ code doesn't use xtensor, you could profitably use
> xtensor-python at the interface. Also, though the article is generally
> framed as using Python as a glue language (i.e. communicating with existing
> C/C++/Fortran code), it is also relevant for the use case where you are
> writing the C/C++/Fortran code from scratch (perhaps just accelerating
> small kernels or whatever). Talking about the available options for that
> use case is perfectly on-topic for that article.
>
> no objections here, xtensor should be highlighted in the pybind11 part for
> these reasons. I just think it should not be a separate section.
>
> Best regards,
> Hans
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20180820/064d1c7e/attachment.html>