[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: csharp swig bindings

From: Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer_at_samba.org>
Date: 2006-07-11 22:32:25 CEST

On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 16:16 -0400, Toby Johnson wrote:
> Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 15:28 -0400, Toby Johnson wrote:
> >
> > > I was surprised to find that no one has worked on C# bindings for
> > > Subversion, now that SWIG supports that language. I started to look into
> > > what the effort would be to work on this, assuming I could start with
> > > the Perl and Ruby bindings as examples, but unfortunately my knowledge
> > > of C is limited and my knowledge of Makefiles even more so.
> > >
> > > So I guess my first question is whether I'm in over my head... maybe my
> > > understanding of SWIG is flawed but I figured once bindings were there
> > > for one language, others would be more or less trivial, but looking at
> > > the libsvn_swig_xx "utility" functions this doesn't seem to be the case.
> > > It seems that not only is a lot of non-trivial C required, but a rather
> > > deep understanding of the Subversion internals.
> > >
> > > Is my assessment of the effort involved here correct, and if so, is
> > > there anyone else with more knowledge of Subversion who has attempted to
> > > generate the C# bindings? I'd be willing to help out with the C# coding
> > > and some of the simpler C stuff if there is any other interest in this
> > > from someone who understands the Subversion internals.
> > >
> > From previous experience with C#, I'd say writing bindings without SWIG
> > might actually be easier. C#'s P/Invoke is very powerful.
> >
> > See the attached C# file for a quick 'n' dirty, but working, example.
> Thanks, that doesn't look so bad after all. This email
> <http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2003-02/0119.shtml> turned me off from
> exploring the P/Invoke route but after I reread, I realized they were
> looking at Windows only. Going the Mono route certainly looks much
> easier.
I'm not sure what the status of shared libs on Windows is at the moment,
not being able to use them on Windows might be a blocker.

> I was also hoping that SWIG would help with the tedium of keeping the
> libraries in sync w/ the official Subversion library but it looks like
> that's unavoidable.
Subversion has done a very good job keeping the API stable during the
current major release series (1.x), so I wouldn't really worry about the
bindings breaking. SWIG bindings will also need a lot of work if you
want them to be sane (use the concepts you'd expect from .NET bindings,



Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer_at_samba.org> - http://samba.org/~jelmer/

Received on Tue Jul 11 22:33:05 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.