On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 03:38 +0300, Antono Vasiljev wrote:
> On 12/08/2011 12:57 AM, Denis Kuzmenok wrote:
> 
> > It   would   be   great   if   someone   write   vapi   for   CTPP2  (
> > http://ctpp.havoc.ru/en/  )  template parser. It's more "clean" and is
> > very   fast   indeed, with precompile, includes, etc..   (that   will
>   allow   using templates   compiled  in
> > php, perl, python, etc).
> Looks cool. However it written in C++ and not used glib. Not sure how
> vala deals with such stuff.

Not using glib isn't really an issue, but C++ is.

> I currently working on vala bindings for ctpl[1]. Ctpl uses glib and
> also cashes token tree in memory. Not sure about speed but it will be
> easier to reuse from vala.

CTPL looks interesting, but it is GPLv3+, which is going to be a
deal-breaker for a *lot* of software.

Another option is Clearsilver.  I used it a while back (circa 2008) in a
Vala project via a very thin C wrapper (mostly just to add reference
counting, IIRC). Looking at it now I don't think it would be too
difficult to create Vala bindings for Clearsilver... the API is a bit
unpleasant at times, but you could at least use it as the basis of a
nice Vala wrapper.

FWIW, I could probably be convinced to write the vapi.

> Currently i've added autotools support for .gir generation and going to
> add some annotation in order to get .gir file convertable to vapi.

Why not just have valac output a vapi directly (i.e., --vapi foo.vapi)?
Or are you talking about bindings for a C library?


-Evan


_______________________________________________
vala-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list

Reply via email to