Hi Mikael, Mikael Djurfeldt <mik...@djurfeldt.com> skribis:
> Sadly, I nowadays only have time to look at guile-devel briefly now and > then. I did this now and happened to see this. Good to read you here! :-) > Just wanted to say that I think that we (or at least I) at some point in > time had the goal to replace structs with pure GOOPS data structures. In > the context of FFI, this would allow you to be more flexible than what > structs allow, ultimately being able to access arbitrary C structs and C++ > structs/classes directly from Scheme. I find that a proper MOP (which > maybe still is not fully developed) is a nicer way to handle non-standard > access than the strange character strings in struct vtables... The struct layout strings are a bit clunky, indeed. ;-) I like the flexibility that GOOPS provide, especially when it comes to extending things like ‘equal?’, ‘write’, and so on. I think it’s better if GOOPS is not a requirement for basic interfaces like this SMOB replacement, though. One of the concerns is performance. For instance, in 2.0, start-up time with GOOPS is on the order of 3 times higher than without it, as measured with: time for i in `seq 1 30` ; do guile -c '(use-modules (oop goops))' ; done Thanks for your feedback! Ludo’.
