Tom, I see you added SWIG as option for adding perl bindings too - in this light it would be perhaps indeed a better idea to use SWIG for all language bindings.
Bryan, again, what do you think about it ? Cheers, Csaba On Mo, 2014-03-03 at 20:13 +0100, Csaba Nagy wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Mo, 2014-03-03 at 10:10 -0600, Tom Browder wrote: > > Jumping in here late for a question with no info on this project: any > > use of or thought of using SWIG? > > SWIG would likely also work, but at this stage we have already a > functioning wrapper using ctpyes/ctypesgen, on linux at least it works > well. On windows it needs some more work to have it working, I wonder if > that would be different using SWIG ? > > From my perspective it's not very important if it's SWIG or ctypes, but > I mostly write code on _top_ of that binding, so Bryan could have some > more strong opinion on this ? > > I did consider that it could perhaps make sense to include the python > bindings in BRL-CAD code, and leave only the python wrapper classes for > a python-brlcad extra package. That would simplify a few things, and > make sure the same environment compiles the python bindings as the core > BRL-CAD. Not sure if SWIG or ctypes is the way to go - Bryan, what do > you think about all this ? > > From my point of view the end result is important - I want to be able to > script BRL-CAD geometry using python. > > Cheers, > Csaba > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subversion Kills Productivity. Get off Subversion & Make the Move to Perforce. With Perforce, you get hassle-free workflows. Merge that actually works. Faster operations. Version large binaries. Built-in WAN optimization and the freedom to use Git, Perforce or both. Make the move to Perforce. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=122218951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ BRL-CAD Developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/brlcad-devel
