[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Specifically:
>
>> # * guile/g-wrap/guile.scm (module-public-interface): Make sure that
>> # using (g-wrap guile) also uses (g-wrap c-codegen), as it used to.
>> # This fixes compilation of guile-gnome.
>> # (generate-wrapset-scm): Reindent for spaces instead of tabs. If
>> # this module had generics, make our public interface export the
>> # generics as well.
>
> Is this a guile-gnome-tailored arrangement? If so, then perhaps we
> should explicitly mention somewhere that G-Wrap is a tool *for*
> guile-gnome, not a tool that seeks generality.
>
> I mean: of course, we don't want to make guile-gnome's life harder for
> no reason. But we should also decide on G-Wrap's goals: if we can make
> it generic enough (and it's already doing good in that respect, better
> than SWIG, needless to say), then we should somehow "set a direction"
> and avoid being too application-specific.
>
>> # * guile/g-wrap/guile-runtime.c
>> # (gw_guile_ensure_latent_generics_hash)
>> # (gw_generics_module_binder_proc)
>> # (gw_guile_ensure_generics_module)
>> # (gw_guile_set_generics_module_x)
>> # ("%gw:procedure-to-method-public!"): Rework so that we don't munge
>> # the root module or the scm module. Instead our generics are
>> # deposited into a module of the user's choosing, defaulting to a
>> # submodule named %generics.
>> #
>> # * guile/g-wrap/guile-runtime.c
>> # * guile/g-wrap/guile-runtime.h
>> # (gw_guile_set_generics_module_x): New public
>> # API.
>
> I don't get those either.
>
>> Any chance these could get in your repo?
>
> Personally, I'd be glad if Andreas could provide use his views on the
> topic. I'd like to see more consistency and clear rationale in the
> changes that we make, and I'd like them to follow *some* vision of what
> G-Wrap should be. In particular, clarify whether G-Wrap is just
> guile-gnome's and Gnumeric's tool (I say "just", but I know it's already
> a lot), or whether it's trying to be a generic replacement for SWIG, at
> least for Guile-targeting programs. I'm hoping for the latter, and I
> believe that's how it started.
>
Well, Wingo's generic method changes are not only benefitting
guile-gnome, but all clients that want to use this feature - they're
not really "application-specific". I hence see no reason not to apply
the changesets. And regarding G-Wrap as a generic SWIG replacement,
I'd say no, since it's unlikely that G-Wrap will support other
languages then Guile (despite the half-finished s48 support).
Cheers, Rotty
--
Andreas Rottmann | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
http://yi.org/rotty | GnuPG Key: http://yi.org/rotty/gpg.asc
Fingerprint | C38A 39C5 16D7 B69F 33A3 6993 22C8 27F7 35A9 92E7
v2sw7MYChw5pr5OFma7u7Lw2m5g/l7Di6e6t5BSb7en6g3/5HZa2Xs6MSr1/2p7 hackerkey.com
Make free software, not war!
_______________________________________________
g-wrap-dev mailing list
g-wrap-dev@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/g-wrap-dev
