The ctypes binding requires manual work each time a new API is
introduced? i.e. a new binding func must be written?
On Aug 30, 2007, at 12:17 PM, "Sage La Torra" <sagelt@gmail.com> wrote:
> As of last week, David James and I think that the Ctypes Python
> Binding Branch is ready for merging, or at least a thorough review in
> preparation for merging. The branch is available at
> http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/branches/ctypes-python-bindings/.
>
> To summarize what the branch is (and what it does):
> The Ctypes Python bindings use the python ctypes module to wrap the
> subversion API. This binding is cleaner and more python-ish then the
> existing SWIG binding. The binding provides a python interface for all
> of the subversion API, as well as providing classes to wrap much of
> the most used functionality. Included in the branch is a brand new
> test suite, which tests the new classes, including utility classes.
>
> The present idea for merging is to include the ctypes bindings as an
> alternative to the SWIG bindings, hopefully with the goal of the
> ctypes bindings being the primary supported binding, deprecating the
> SWIG bindings. I believe the ctypes bindings are better, but keeping
> the SWIG bindings maintains compatibility with existing SWIG-based
> code.
>
> Anyway, at this point David and I would like to ask for input and
> opinions. Any comments, suggestions, or "merge +1"s welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Sage LaTorra
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Aug 31 01:13:12 2007