*   Surely the 100% handwritten bindings - such as PDAL for C# or GDAL for 
Node.js or Julia

Hi,

Just a small clarification, the Julia bindings are a 100% automatic creation 
and cost very little, when one knows how to do it.

Joaquim

From: gdal-dev <gdal-dev-boun...@lists.osgeo.org> On Behalf Of Momtchil 
Momtchev via gdal-dev
Sent: Saturday, February 1, 2025 10:09 PM
To: gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [gdal-dev] CSharp bindings queued for removal (was Re: GDAL CSharp 
bindings maintainers/contributors listening... ?)



On 31/01/2025 23:31, Howard Butler via gdal-dev wrote:
On Jan 31, 2025, at 8:18 AM, Even Rouault via gdal-dev 
<gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org><mailto:gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org> wrote:

My experience with GDAL informed what we did with PDAL. The first thing was to 
not use SWIG. Lessons were learned, as they say :) The approach of a single 
unified language binding generator was in fashion in the 1990s at the same time 
as using UML to automatically write software. History has shown both of these 
things to have frustrating consequences.



In 2025 SWIG still has no alternatives. It is surely dated and it may be time 
to think about a successor project, but currently I am not aware of anyone 
actually working on it.

Recently there has been a new way to do it, pioneered by Boost and made very 
popular by the pybind11 project. This same approach has been copied by embind 
in emscripten/WASM and I also have my own nobind17 for Node.js. Even if these 
are much faster to learn and easier to maintain - because they do not require a 
special and very awkward specific language - everything is only C++ - they lack 
many of the advanced features that allow a very large library such as GDAL to 
have a fully native feel  - especially one that has not been designed from 
scratch to be used from a higher-level language.

Surely the 100% handwritten bindings - such as PDAL for C# or GDAL for Node.js 
or Julia - have their advantages, but the development cost is orders of 
magnitude higher. If I was to start GDAL for Node.js from scratch, I was surely 
going to use SWIG. Both GDAL for Node.js and GDAL for Julia use handwritten 
code because at the time of their creation, SWIG did not have good support for 
those languages. PDAL's API is orders of magnitude smaller than GDAL and it has 
been designed to be used from a higher-level language.

I personally think that the future belongs to a project that will use the LLVM 
front-end and produce pybind11-like code, but this project does not exist. 
NativeScript is going in this direction for JavaScript, but they too, they lack 
many of the advanced SWIG features.

Now, of course, if there is no one to work on GDAL for C#, there is nothing to 
be done. It is unlikely there will ever be onboarding for this, as its cost is 
far too great for something that probably will be used only once. I am afraid 
that there are no real alternatives besides SWIG.
_______________________________________________
gdal-dev mailing list
gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev

Reply via email to