From: Linas Vepstas <linasvepstas@gmail.com>
To: Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net>
Cc: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>, guile-user <guile-user@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: new sqlite binding
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 22:46:33 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTin3HUt5a3+_8k6A0mck8-PXPtN6ohVt+_A0+maO@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877hfqemcq.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net>
On 3 December 2010 12:35, Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> wrote:
> Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:
>
>> But I would like to mention the downside of the dynamic FFI
>> approach: with the static FFI you get typechecking by the C
>> compiler, but with the dynamic FFI you're on your own.
>
> Interesting point, thanks.
>
>> I suppose you could also use the C compiler to at least check that the
>> function type you declared is correct; if you want to do, at runtime,
>>
>> (pointer->procedure int (dynamic-func "foo" (dynamic-link)) (list int32))
>>
>> you could at least make a compile-time check that
>>
>> typedef int (*foo_type) (int32 bar);
>> int main (...)
>> { foo_type bar = foo; return 0; }
>>
>> doesn't produce any warnings with -Wall, or something.
>
> Hmm, that's almost as annoying as just writing the C code anyway.
>
> I guess what we want is to validate Scheme FFI code against the relevant
> C header file(s). Hopefully something like SWIG or GCC modularisation
> might give us that in the future.
Would g-wrap work? I remember g-wrap was written about 10 years ago,
back when swig didn't work so well, and certainly didn't work well with
guile. But I had the impression that g-wrap went defunct. Not sure.
(what do I know? for all I know, maybe g-wrap morphed into ffi).
--linas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-07 4:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-25 14:12 new sqlite binding Andy Wingo
2010-11-27 6:20 ` Linas Vepstas
2010-11-28 11:51 ` Neil Jerram
2010-11-28 16:08 ` Linas Vepstas
2010-11-29 21:11 ` Andy Wingo
2010-11-29 20:50 ` Andy Wingo
2010-12-03 18:35 ` Neil Jerram
2010-12-07 4:46 ` Linas Vepstas [this message]
2010-12-07 9:50 ` Neil Jerram
2010-11-29 20:43 ` Andy Wingo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=AANLkTin3HUt5a3+_8k6A0mck8-PXPtN6ohVt+_A0+maO@mail.gmail.com \
--to=linasvepstas@gmail.com \
--cc=guile-user@gnu.org \
--cc=neil@ossau.uklinux.net \
--cc=wingo@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).