[Numpy-discussion] Add pybind11 to docs about writing binding code (original) (raw)
Hans Dembinski hans.dembinski at gmail.com
Mon Aug 20 11:52:15 EDT 2018
- Previous message (by thread): [Numpy-discussion] Add pybind11 to docs about writing binding code
- Next message (by thread): [Numpy-discussion] Add pybind11 to docs about writing binding code
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
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
- Previous message (by thread): [Numpy-discussion] Add pybind11 to docs about writing binding code
- Next message (by thread): [Numpy-discussion] Add pybind11 to docs about writing binding code
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]