Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Sat, Jul 22, 2006 at 06:06:39PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | For external use a python extension seems to be in orderi. This could
| > | be just a thin wrapper around the lfun interface. [This is closer to
| > | 'embedding LyX in Python'.]
| > |
| > | This _could_ also use a LyX instance that's connected over a server
| > | pipe, but would be much simpler to put everything of LyX - main() in
| > | a lib and link to this lib.
| >
| > How will this make anything easier?
|
| Because it we do not have to create that 'liblyxkernel' that would be
| needed for a simple python extension.
ok. But what I am saying is that we don't need either.
| > I still need to have communication between two processes?
|
| I am bassically talking about simple linking and a simgle process.
Do we really feel the overwelming need for an embedded script
language?
| > But can we then easily take advantage over that stability? Or have we
| > just made everything harder since we know have external api's to
| > adhere to.
|
| About 20 different C-style function calls at max. Certainly less than
| the other dependencies we have right now.
But the other dependencies do not go away, you we only add to the
total.
--
Lgb
