Luke Crook wrote: > Peter Seibel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Is there any chance of hacking Swig to >> generate proper Lispy names? > > It goes half way, generating lispy versions of function names, see http:// > www.swig.org/Doc1.3/Lisp.html > > But I don't think SWIG generates the lispy equivalents for enums or struct > members. One of the SWIG CFFI hackers is on this list. Perhaps he can chime > in > on this. > >> So if the underlying .h changed you'd have to re-run swig and then >> re-edit the generated file? > > At first I was hesitant to make the change due to this. But the external > libraries we use are quite mature and so API's remain relatively static > across > revisions. It only takes me a minute or two to check the diffs of the .h > files > for every new SDL release and manually make the appropriate updates to > lispbuilder-sdl.
I see. The other issue--and the reason I happened to ask about it today--is it'd be a bit easier to grok the code base if I could tell which bits were completely machine generated versus hand written versus machine generated and hand hacked. If you happen to get bored sometime and wanted to make up a list of which are which, I'd be happy to put comments in the files to help out the next guy to come along. -Peter -- Peter Seibel : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gigamonkeys Consulting : http://www.gigamonkeys.com/ _______________________________________________ application-builder mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/application-builder
