Chris Albertson wrote: > The idea is to wrte a library or API in c/c++ and then swig will > automatically generate language binding for Perl, TCL, C, Ruby, Lisp > and a bunch more. > Now the user has a choise
I don't think that is such a good idea - apart from resulting in a splintered implementation with no standards or guidelines, it creates a lot of extra work for people to document all 392 different language bindings. Maybe further down the track it might be worth offering different bindings, just so that 1% of the userbase can write their dialplan in Visual COBOL.Net, but right now we need to band together a bit and focus on a common goal (and common implementation of that goal). > The language is "just syntax" the hard part is the API design. It will > have to > include primitives for defining extensions, starting mail, hanging up > and so on > and a set of sequencers (functions that call other functions in order) Exactly - the big question is whether the dialplan API will be changed, and if so, to what? _______________________________________________ Openpbx-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev
