1. 1

TL;DR from the article:

“I rewrote the cppyy CMake modules to be much more user friendly and to work using only Anaconda/PyPI packages, and to generate more feature-complete and customizable Python packages using CMake’s configure_file, while also supporting distribution of cppyy pythonization functions. I then rewrote the existing k-nearest-neighbors example project to use my new system, and wrote bindings generation for bbhash as an example with a real library. Finally, I wrote a recipe for cookiecutter to generate project templates for CMake-built cppyy binding”


  2. 2

    Interested to know what features made this the choice. Tried pybind and it seemed OK too.

    1. 1

      I’m interested too! I haven’t gotten around to doing a proper comparison yet myself due to other deadline pressures, but I owe my coworkers one soon. Happened upon this article while researching options. This article indicates that cppyy works well with templates, maybe that’s the killer app? I look forward to experimenting with the options but pybind was another top contender for me. My team has a mixed C++/Python codebase so we could definitely use a binding solution that works both ways. We haven’t had a pressing need for it quite yet though.

      1. 2

        Nice thanks for the link.