Hi Boris, On 07/03/2008, Boris Kolpackov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Jason, all, > > I am wondering what is the status of the swig subdirectory. I > tried to do make test-suite but ended up with compile errors. > Alberto also confirms that the code in it is not functional. > According to SVN, there hasn't been any development in swig > for the past 16 months.
I've been making this very low priority over the past year as it seemed that the 3.0 release was not happening. I put a lot of effort merging the Xerces-P codebase into the 3.0 tree, but then I really lost momentum. I do have time at the moment to ensure that the swig directory compiles and produces a working perl module. This will probably take me 2-3 days. > > Is anybody planning to get it into shape and continue development? > If not, we should probably move it out of the Xerces-C++ code base. Good question! Let me get everything into SVN and compiling again and then I will have to let c-dev to decide the future of the scripting language bindings to Xerces-C. I have written them and been maintaining them but I find the my projects are taking me away from XML parsing, so it would be good to find another helper that wants to continue holding the SWIG bindings. If not and no one wants the SWIG bindings anymore, then they should be removed. I made an effort to contact the Ruby, Python, and Tcl communities to let them know of the existence of the SWIG bindings, and that they could benefit by having instant access to Xerces-C thru those bindings, but I didn't get much of a response in the lists I contacted. If one other language could be added, I believe it would become much easier to support the bindings. As it is, there is only Perl, so all the work falls onto the Perl maintainer's shoulders. Cheers, jas. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
