Boost.Python is too slow for a practical application system. It takes several hours to extract features for only ten thousand images using the current pycaffe interface. There shouldn't be such a huge performance gap between the C++ version and the other languages. According to some benchmark results, Cython can be much faster than Boost.Python. It Caffe wants the users to frequently use the concise Python interface in their daily experiments, the binding technology should be changed to Cython.

Simple benchmark between Cython and Boost.Python
http://blog.chrischou.org/2010/02/28/simple-benchmark-between-cython-and-boost-python/

C++ wrapper benchmark: Cython, PyBindGen, Boost
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/cython-users/lQO9lGj5JEc

[Stackless] [C++-sig] [Boost] Trouble optimizing Boost.Python integration for game development (it seems too slow)
http://www.stackless.com/pipermail/stackless/2009-August/004249.html

Python vs. Cython vs. D (PyD) vs. C++ (SWIG)
http://prabhuramachandran.blogspot.com/2008/09/python-vs-cython-vs-d-pyd-vs-c-swig.html

https://github.com/cython/cython/wiki/SWIG