On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Troy Melhase <troy.melh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> We probably could replace SWIG with SIP, but it is unlikely we would >> do it soon just because BPBible works and works now with what is >> there. The changes you describe would be far more likely to benefit >> the Python programmer working with the SWORD API directly than they >> would be to benefit us, and so I'm not keen on making changes to >> working code as a priority. > > I'm sorry for not being more clear. My intention is not to replace > anything, I was asking for help with testing and for confirmation that > other folks can get this to compile. And this couldn't replace the > SWIG bindings, not even close, because this works for Python only, not > Perl, Ruby, TCL, Scheme, etc.
I was talking solely about BPBible, not about SWORD generally. If SIP turned out to be better then we would certainly think about using it. As for SWIG support, while there has certainly been interest from a number of other people in SWIG bindings, I am not sure that there are too many projects (major or minor) that use the SWIG bindings, and I think there are even fewer that are still active now (which of course doesn't mean we should drop support for it). Jon _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
