[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-2712?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16515360#comment-16515360
]
Jamie Elliott commented on ARROW-2712:
--------------------------------------
I wanted to say - I already thought of a cool name for a .NET Arrow
implementation. Can anyone guess?
> .NET Language Binding for Arrow
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: ARROW-2712
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-2712
> Project: Apache Arrow
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: GLib
> Reporter: Jamie Elliott
> Priority: Major
> Labels: features, newbie
>
> A feature request. I've seen this pop up in a few places. Want to have a
> record of discussion on this topic.
> I may be open to contributing this, but first need some general guidance on
> approach so I can understand effort level.
> It looks like there is not a good tool available for GObject Introspection
> binding to .NET so the easy pathway via Arrow Glib C API appears to be
> closed.
> The only GObject integration for .NET appears to be Mono GAPI
> [http://www.mono-project.com/docs/gui/gtksharp/gapi/]
> From what I can see this produces a GIR or similar XML, then generates C#
> code directly from that. Likely involves many manual fix ups of the XML.
> Worth a try?
>
> Alternatively I could look at generating some other direct binding from .NET
> to C/C++. Where I work we use Swig [http://www.swig.org/]. Good for vanilla
> cases, requires hand crafting of the .i files and specialized marshalling
> strategies for optimizing performance critical cases.
> Haven't tried CppSharp but it looks more appealing than Swig in some ways
> [https://github.com/mono/CppSharp/wiki/Users-Manual]
> In either case, not sure if better to use Glib C API or C++ API directly.
> What would be pros/cons?
>
>
>
>
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
