Am Thu, 12 Aug 2010 15:08:05 -0400 schrieb Clinton Ebadi <[email protected]>:
> Christopher Roy Bratusek <[email protected]> writes: > > > Hi fine folks, > > > > so GTK+ 3.0 will be in town around middle of September. Sawfish 3.0 which is > > *currently* scheduled for June 2011 will be using it (or rather GTK+ 3.2 > > which is > > released in March 2011). Either way: the glue-code generator for rep-gtk is > > rather > > ugly. > > > > So there are two opportunities (actually there are three, but the third is > > rejected): > > > > a) port g-wrap to librep and get bindings to c-apps easily. Difficulty > > ****, examples: > > only g-wrap itself. > > IIRC g-wrap is more or less unmaintained now so this is probably a bad > idea (Guile 2.0 has a dynamic FFI built in based upon libffi). librep has basic ffi bindings, which may be extended. > > b) glue librep and gobject-introspection (gis) and get bindings to > > gis-using apps > > easily (basically everything gnome-related). Difficulty **, examples: > > python-gtk, > > gtkmm (and maybe other bindings) already gis, so we may learn from them. > > I'd take a look to what guile-gnome is doing as well. the last time i've check it has been using g-wrap. > > > Well I would prefer b). The problem is: the missing manpower. So this is > > also a call > > to contributors. (ehh.. to YOU - YOU there and YOU (who want's to leave the > > show now)) > > > > Just to complete the list: c) would be switching to GUILE. Rejected. There > > are various > > reason for rejecting the switch. (...) > > Actually, is there any reason to not retarget librep onto the guile-vm? > By this I mean, if patches were to magically appear would they be > rejected? 90%: yes… basically I've never rejected "magically appearing patches", but I doubt on this thing. > By targetting the Guile VM REP would gain the ability to call Guile > functions... Scheme and REP are similar enough that it seems > straightforward enough (the only hairy issue is probably nil as false -- > but Guile has a sort-of solution to this now for the emacs-lisp compiler > by having a special #nil value that satisfies both false? and > null?... ugly from a type theoretic standpoint but multi-language > support is in the early stages). > > I'm familiar enough with the Guile internals to do this, but I've yet to > really look around librep. > Well… I'm not sure how useful it is to use librep and then depend on guile doing the stuff. FFI and GIS are better options if you ask me. Regards, Chris
