[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback
From: |
john |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback |
Date: |
Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:59:23 +0000 |
So create another shared library which uses the Chicken shared library
which then provides the clean API and hides other functionality away
from the C app! You are right that does seem more straight forward
then trying to separate and use inter-process communication. Oh well,
I need to find another reason to play with D-Bus I guess.
Thanks Elf.
On 15/02/2008, Elf <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, john wrote:
>
>
> > This is what I do now. I actually package Chicken for the mobile which
> > installs the shared library. I was looking at a cleaner separation so
> > one app remained C without FFI code (or knowledge of Chicken) the
> > other remained Chicken (with knowledge of D-Bus). The interface
> > between the two being D-Bus. I am quite possibly trying to over
> > engineer something here but interested in the alternatives to
> > embedding. I would like to tell John Doe, you write this C app that
> > talks to D-Bus. John Doe is happy as he knows how to talk to D-Bus
> > from his C app and has never heard of Chicken or Scheme or
> > s-expressions. John Doe does not need to care beyond that point how
> > the data is encoded/sent/decoded/received and can build his app the
> > way he knows how.
> >
>
>
> way overengineered. just wrap the chicken lib in a nice api ...
> then john doe doesnt need to know anything about chicken or that chicken is
> there, hes just loading some shared lib that gives server access.
>
>
> -elf
>
>
>
> > Regards,
> >
> > John.
> >
> > On 14/02/2008, Elf <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, john wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Yes, I remember talk of dbus! Any progress Shawn?
> >> >
> >> > I am actually doing what you describe now and embedding Chicken to C
> >> > to handle s-expressions and bit stuffing them (packedobjects). I was
> >> > curious though to examine ways of removing the dependency of Chicken
> >> > from the graphical client and using dbus to communicate with another
> >> > entity that handles the s-expressions. Removing Chicken would simplify
> >> > building the graphical client on the mobile. The problem is just moved
> >> > to another place and hidden from C developers who could focus on the
> >> > client. If that makes sense.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> whats wrong with simply including libchicken.so (built for whatever
> platform)
> >> with the codeball for the graphical client? wouldnt need to build
> chicken
> >> again there and youd be simplifying interfaces and reducing
> dependencies...
> >> with a little work, you could even write some code that only used the
> bits
> >> of chicken you needed, compile that to a static lib, and send that, if
> >> space is at an insane premium...
> >>
> >>
> >> -elf
> >>
> >
>
- [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, john, 2008/02/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, Elf, 2008/02/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, john, 2008/02/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, Elf, 2008/02/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, john, 2008/02/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, Elf, 2008/02/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, john, 2008/02/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, john, 2008/02/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, Elf, 2008/02/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback,
john <=
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, Shawn Rutledge, 2008/02/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, Shawn Rutledge, 2008/02/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, john, 2008/02/15
- Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, john, 2008/02/15
Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback, Ivan Raikov, 2008/02/14