Rob Browning writes:
> Ariel Rios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> One thing I've wondered about for a while now is whether or not it
> might make sense to mirror (in scheme forms) the semantics of one of
> the IDLs (CORBA being the biggest elephant on the block).
>
> However, on the other side of that fence, I also wonder, whether or
> not there might be a legitimate place for a tool (and perhaps g-wrap
> should be that tool), that's exclusively focused on providing very
> well integrated, efficient, and clear (both in specification and in
> execution) bindings for C APIs from guile. Basically the question
> comes down to "Is it possible in this case to server all masters
> well?".
>
> Or in more concrete terms, say I were to try to do something very
> CORBA-esque with g-wrap's spec. Would I end up with a tool that was
> much more complex, harder to implement and understand, and didn't
> really provide any substantial improvments as compared to a tool
> that's specifically aimed at just the guile<->C API problem?
>
I've played with CORBA a little bit, though haven't implemented any
industrial-strength systems in it. CORBA is fine if you write your
code around the IDL. It's not a suitable tool to make an existing C
API available.
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gnumatic.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
