On 04/19/2011 04:01 PM, Sebastian Spaeth wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 17:03:01 +0200, Florian Friesdorf <flo at 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.
> 
>> Na?vely, 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

Reply via email to