From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: rm@fabula.de Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: What can I do to help? (conclusions) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 19:08:04 +0200 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <20021006170804.GA7206@www> References: <20021004132911.GD20754@www> <87k7ky5ggq.fsf@alice.rotty.yi.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1033923211 28963 127.0.0.1 (6 Oct 2002 16:53:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 16:53:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rm@fabula.de, "Dale P. Smith" , guile-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17yEeo-0007X1-00 for ; Sun, 06 Oct 2002 18:53:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17yEeR-0005sU-00; Sun, 06 Oct 2002 12:53:07 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17yEdb-0004EV-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Oct 2002 12:52:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17yEd3-00037b-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Oct 2002 12:51:42 -0400 Original-Received: from www.elogos.de ([212.18.192.92]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17yEcX-0001w8-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Oct 2002 12:51:09 -0400 Original-Received: by www.elogos.de (Postfix, from userid 5001) id B257E1049B8; Sun, 6 Oct 2002 19:08:04 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Andreas Rottmann Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87k7ky5ggq.fsf@alice.rotty.yi.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.24i Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1465 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1465 On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 06:14:29PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > rm@fabula.de writes: > [...] > > Yes, a GOOPS-ish guile-libxml would be great, but there _is_ currently > > no C goops interface. > > > I always wonder why people say that... There is a goops.h, which > declares basically all the functions you need. i I never said it wouldn'T be possible to write bindings that use goops -- as far as i understand there are no official (read: stable ) APIs, and the last thing i want to do is to manually craft bindings that stop working after the next major (minor?) version change. A while ago i really wanted to use SCWM, but unfortunately the program used some carefully handcrafted code to catch exceptions (see some of the recent posts in this mailing list) that worked fine in the version of Guile it was designed for but broke misserably on my newer version. I'd be willing to do such work if unavoidable but i would not want to write bindings for a monster like libxml2 unless i know it's going to be there for a while ;-) > Well, you could build > some higher-level/easier-to-use functions on top of them, and in some > areas there are no 'clean' bindings so you have to do a bit of > hackery, but I managed to implement a C++ interface to GOOPS - so it > *is* possible. It took me some hours of poking around in goops.c, > since the stuff is not really documented. > >> [...] > Hmm, you begin to provoke my interest. Maybe after my C++ interface is > mature enough (should be in a few weeks), I might give it a shot, > however, it would help me a lot to get going how you imagine the > interface to look like. Well, i have one sitting on my box, but am reluctant to publish it because a) it's handcrafted (-> lot's of duplicated code and still a lot is missing) b) i don't like the API ... i find with such an important lib it's of utter importance to find a 'natural' way of integrating XML into Scheme/Guile (i'm pretty impressed by Oleg's work) -- also, i'm using Daniel Veillard's Python bindings daily (i have to, i'm affraid) and i'm very unhappy with the way they feel (too C-ish). I envision to follow Daniel's path in auto-creating the bindings from the exisiting API description in XML format. > Talking about C++, I suggest adding configure flag that causes the > Guile interpreter to be linked by g++, so modules can be implemented > in C++. (Python, on Debian, for example is linked this way). Hmmm, what are the consequences in terms of code emitted -- doesn't that result in (horrible) stuff like symbol name mangling ? Ralf Mattes _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel