On Wed, 22 Aug 2001, David Beazley wrote: > I've looked briefly at Inline and agree that it's a pretty nifty > approach. However, usability aside, it's got a number of pretty major > limitations once you start getting into structure wrapping, C++ > classes, and other advanced types of extension wrapping. I think the audiences are different. SWIG is for taking an existing library of C or C++ code and making it available in Python. It seems to me that Inline is about making multiple languages available to a programmer while the programmer is writing new code. I agree with you that the first task is much, much harder. However, there is also a useful payoff from the second. -- ?!ng
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4