On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Phil Harvey <p...@philharveyonline.com>wrote:

> Thanks for the responses guys. That all makes sense.
> The only change that I'd propose is therefore that the Perl and Java
> bindings:
> bindings/perl/libcproton_perl.so bindings/java/libproton-swig.so
> ... should both be renamed to libcproton.so.
> Compared to the other bindings, it seems inconsistent for the former to
> state its Perl-ness in its name, and for the latter to state its Swig-ness.
> Thoughts?

Given what little I know of loading JNI stuff, that seems to make sense for

FWIW, the python and ruby bindings don't ever actually expose the name of
the C extension library since in both cases we have the so-called
"buttercream frosting layer" that wraps the raw C extension module. I would
hope we'd have something similar for perl and Java so that these names
shouldn't ever be visible to users.


Reply via email to