Re: Java binding - SWIG or not? Not!

On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 09:46:04AM +0100, Hans Marggraff wrote:
> I have looked at the java bindings too and tried to get them working.
> I posted the original question, and since have played with swig.
>
> The design of svn makes use of swig very hard. Svn exposes a mass of interfaces
> that reach right through to its underlying libraries (neon etc)
> Swig will try to generate wrappers for these too which leads to an unmanageable
> mass of interfaces, most of which are superfluous.

What did you do? Run SWIG yourself right over our .h files? Eesh... No
wonder it isn't coming out very well.

Take a look at subversion/bindings/swig/. The top-level Makefile even has
some stuff already for generating the Java bindings.

> This can be turned off by defining mappings for swig, however these mappings did not
> appear much simpler than to to a concise JNI wrapper.
>
> To be able to generate or to maintain the java interface *automatically* via swig
> is an illusion in my opinion.

We've been doing exactly this for the Python wrappers, and I believe it is
also working (to a point) for the Java stuff that Daniel Rall has been
working on.

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