[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?
Bobby D. Bryant
Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?
Fri, 04 May 2001 23:50:41 +0600
Sam Tregar wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2001, Bobby D. Bryant wrote:
> > I did a draft set of Guile->Ada bindings back during my winter break (which
> > I continue to hack on at a slower pace), and I've found that the gh_ stuff
> > provides most of the basic Scheme functionality, and the limited scope of
> > gh_ made it very easy to get the necessary traction for getting something
> > useful working in a finite amount of time.
> Is there anywhere I can take a look at what you've produced? It could be
> quite helpful.
There's a throw-down page for it at
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/bdbryant/guile-for-ada/index.html, with links for
viewing most of the code on line. Or you can download the kit from the same
and poke through it off line.
Files named *.ads are specifications (interfaces) and *.adb are the associated
bodies (implementations). A *.adb file without an associated *.ads is a main
What's there is version 0.8.2, which is actually usable, but needs to have a few
more functions bound, plus a few other things (such as the ever-laggard
documentation). There is a modicum of in-line documentation, so you should be
able to get at least the gist of what I'm doing. The 'ppp' appearing in
comments is just an eyecatcher for self-reminders.
I have some changes that I've done since then, which will probably bring it up
a justifiable 0.9 or so, but I need to look at a patch someone sent me before I
put out another release. However, I will send you my current TODO as a separate
> > Let's don't pretend I'm an expert, but FWIW I think you'll find that you can
> > use gh_ for the core of your interface, and then add in some additional scm_
> > stuff if you want to support more functionality.
> That sounds like a good approach. My only fear about that was the
> ominously empty section of the in-progress docs titled something like
> "Combining gh_ and scm_ calls". It made me think maybe that wasn't such
> a good idea.
It wouldn't be the first time I painted myself into a corner. I hope I live
enough that it's not the last, either!
p.s. - Once you get it semi-working, be sure and get it posted to
http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/gnu-guile-projects.html, so others can find it
easily. I believe yours will go down in the "Exports" section with mine. There
used to be an automated mechanism for posting things, but a note at the top of
the page says you should query the list for a how-to (because, I believe,
is doing a major rework of the project tracking system).
- To gh_ or not to gh_?, Sam Tregar, 2001/05/04
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Michael Livshin, 2001/05/04
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Bobby D. Bryant, 2001/05/04
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Neil Jerram, 2001/05/05
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Marius Vollmer, 2001/05/05
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Keith Wright, 2001/05/07
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Bill Gribble, 2001/05/07
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Rob Browning, 2001/05/10
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Evan Prodromou, 2001/05/10
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Neil Jerram, 2001/05/11
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Keith Wright, 2001/05/11
- Re: To gh_ or not to gh_?, Dirk Herrmann, 2001/05/12