On 04/19/2011 04:01 PM, Sebastian Spaeth wrote: > On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 17:03:01 +0200, Florian Friesdorf <f...@chaoflow.net> > wrote: >> Is it sane to have python bindings that need updates or would a plain >> wrapper of the notmuch script (that maybe needs less updates) be better? >> I don't want to imply that this can be answered with yes/no, but more to >> get a comparison of the two approaches. > > Invoking notmuch the script and piping the results? I wouldn't call that > python bindings anymore then. Also it is bound to be much more expensive > than directly interfacing libnotmuch.so. > >> Naïvely, I imagine there is a header file and the generation of the >> python bindings happens rather automagic. > > I wish it would be that easy. :-)
I've never actually used it, so I may be way off base, but would it be possible to use SWIG (http://www.swig.org/) to automatically generate bindings when the C library is updated, or at least provide a decent starting point? Aaron _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch