On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Attila Lendvai <att...@lendvai.name> wrote: > are you saying that the json output could be converted to some sexp > form with a macro on the top, so that the macro could expand into the > cffi definitions? and this file should be the one that gets checked in > to the repos, not the json file? (as opposed to generating a > standalone tmp lisp file from the json file holding the cffi > definitions in the ASDF fasl cache; which is done already)
No need for the macro on the top, that macro could be defined a priori somewhere else in cffi-c2ffi. > cl-json itself reads it into alists, so it shouldn't be hard... but > what would we gain? one slight drawback would be that M-. would take > us to the big toplevel macro, not the actual cffi definition. So if the resulting spec file looked something like ;; spec file starts here (cffi-c2ffi:definition foo ...) (cffi-c2ffi:definition bar ...) (cffi-c2ffi:definition baz ...) ;; spec file ends here Then M-. takes us to one of the definitions and the actual CFFI definition would be a macroexpansion away. What do we gain? I'm not sure. I think this way is more lispy and less complex, but that's just a gut feeling at this point. Cheers, -- Luís Oliveira http://kerno.org/~luis/
