Re: Python bindings

>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel L Rall <dlr@apache.org> writes:

    Daniel> C. Michael Pilato wrote: ...
>> I think the fact that would benefit only the Python side of
>> things is non-negligible downside.
    Daniel> ...

    Daniel> This is an important point. What about all the other
    Daniel> languages which SWIG supports? Sharing the core of the
    Daniel> bindings implementation across languages is powerful
    Daniel> reuse.

As said, I second that. But when it comes to effectively weighting
the hassle/benefit ratio, I think that other more specific ways of
laying down the bindings would make them a) more powerfull and b)
maintainable.

But even then, saying that there is an effective code sharing between
the bindings is a bit optimistic: the hardest part /introduced/ by
SWIG is that you need go and implement a wrapper for each object / for
each language. Yes, the /declarations/ are in common, but the hard
work of dealing with arguments-transformer-function coupled with
this-and-that function signature is a pita.

ciao, lele.

-- 
nickname: Lele Gaifax	| Quando vivrò di quello che ho pensato ieri
real: Emanuele Gaifas	| comincerò ad aver paura di chi mi copia.
email: lele@seldati.it	|		-- Fortunato Depero, 1929.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org