There are patches up for nserror bindings in bug 1320179 ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1320179).
If people have API design opinions, you can let me know on the bug. On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:22 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2017-03-27 5:10 PM, Michael Layzell wrote: > > I don't think it would be too hard. At one point I had a WIP patch which > > implemented it, but I would have to dig it up again. > > > > I'll see if I can get a patch up for the crate in my spare time. > > Thank you! > > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com > > <mailto:ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > On 2017-03-17 10:08 AM, Michael Layzell wrote: > > > I don't think we have any particularity good tools for this right > now. A > > > while ago I filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ > show_bug.cgi?id=1320179 > > <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1320179> to > > > add a separate crate like the nsstring crate which provides the > nsresult > > > bindings. If we are starting to get more use cases for it we > probably want > > > to implement something like it which moves the error code > definition code > > > into python or similar, and then generates both rust and C++ > bindings in > > > the outdir. > > > > I think the right way to do it is to have an nsresult crate as you > > suggest. How much work would that be? > > > > As far as code parsing goes, we already have nsError.h, so why can't > we > > just use rustbindgen? But I guess moving the definitions elsewhere > and > > generating the headers out of them is easy as well. The build > system's > > support for generated files is pretty good as far as I know. > Whichever > > way is easier is better, I guess! > > > > > > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
