Re: Java binding - SWIG or not?

On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 11:02:04PM +0100, Oliver Geisser wrote:
> Hi
>
> Jesper Steen Møller wrote:
> > My (perhaps) ambitious goal is to write a Subversion client to build
> > into Eclipse.

Very cool.

>...
> > How should I contribute?
> > A. Work on completing/improving/testing the SWIG/Java bindings
> > B. Adjust/complete the original JNI effort

I would recommend (A). Over the long-haul, having the bindings automatically
update w.r.t the libraries' APIs will be much better. Having to hand-code
each wrapper and maintain that will be a pain and will fall out of sync very
easily.

>...
> Copy the way SWT interacts with native toolkits.
> The SWT JNI bindings are the smallest possible wrappers around
> the native C functions. Everything else is done on the
> Java side.

I'm not entirely sure exactly what SWT does, but that is the recommend
procedure: wrap the functions exactly as they are -- get them up into the
other language. In *that* language, create your language-specific and
language-stylistic abstractions.

Python and Java and Perl will have *very* different notions of the "right"
way to expose the SVN functionality. So let the wrappers give you the
basics, and then do it Right in the other language.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org