[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Lua/C++ binding library showdown: who's the best?
- From: Ben Sunshine-Hill <sneftel@...>
- Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:49:42 -0700
On 10/25/05, Nick Trout <email@example.com> wrote:
> This is interesting feedback. I've just started to tinker with LuaBind.
> Have you used Boost.Python at all? Anyone else? If so, how do your
> experiences of LuaBind and Boost.Python compare?
> WRT MS tools, you can actually _use_ template metaprogramming libraries
> now that MSVC 7.1 has decent C++ compliance and gives feedback on
> template errors. It was an exercise in time wasting and frustration for
> MSVC6 due to having to use STLport and lack of error feedback.
I hate them equally. :-D It's not very charitable of me, I know... and
I hasten to mention that the authors of both have done an admirable
job. But IMHO, ultimately it is a losing battle; the metaprogramming
features of C++ are insufficient for doing this simply and robustly.
It's nice to be able to bind without a separate package file, but even
in 7.1 the errors are anything but readable, and compilation times are
still huge. Again, the authors of LuaBind and Boost::Python are not to
blame for this. But I dislike the tradeoffs involved in misusing C++
for such a purpose.
And don't even get me started on boost::spirit and boost::lambda.