Are there plans to include C99 'complex' type in Foreign, maybe as CFloatComplex, CDoubleComplex and CLongDoubleComplex? (...)
A separate library for new types to add to Foreign would be the easiest way forward. (...)
If it's not true, i.e., I could actually have some arbitrary sized parameter as argument to a function or as a return value (and not its pointer), what did I saw wrong? (...)
Oh, you mean you need to teach the compiler about
> unboxed complex types? I think so. Take this, for instance: #include <complex.h> double complex ccos(double complex z); float complex ccosf(float complex z); long double complex ccosl(long double complex z); To bind to ccos* functions I believe I would need a native CComplex. The GSL numeric library also makes use of something like that, although it defines its own 'complex' structure. I'm writing a binding to the standard C library, and at the same time collecting a list of standard types that could be usefull in Foreign. I'm thinking about writing a ticket to ask for inclusion of a few of them. 'int32_t' and 'int64_t' as, say, CInt32 and CInt64 could be nice for portability. Maurício _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
