Re: What replaces scm_register_module_xxx (Doc update?)

[Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net>]

>>>>> "rm" == rm  <rm@fabula.de> writes:

    rm> I think there's a misunderstanding/misconception here (or,
    rm> better: in guile's current C api). The
    rm> 'load-c-functions-through-scheme' aproach might be fine and
    rm> all that's needed as long as we only want to extend _guile_
    rm> (the application) with external libs. But guile is inteded to
    rm> be an embedded srcipting language as well (at least that's
    rm> what the documentation says). If i want my users to be able to
    rm> script some of my applications functionality there's no
    rm> library i can load with 'load-extension' -- of course i could
    rm> put the tiny scm_* wrapper functions into a dll and have
    rm> _that_ loaded, but i wouldn't call this good design practise
    rm> (oh, i could 'load-extension' my own application instead, but
    rm> that's not really portable ...). Having to provide (and
    rm> deploy!) scm file(s) just to be able to put my functions into
    rm> different modules feels clumsy.

Right now I'm afraid I don't follow the structure of your
extension(s), but it certainly sounds to me like you ought to be able
to achieve what you are trying to.

Could you describe the structure in more detail, in terms of code
modules (C and Scheme), libraries, how things get loaded and
configured, etc.?

        Neil


_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel