Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] swig like library...
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: art yerkes <ayerkes@s...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] swig like library...
On 25 Apr 2004 06:11:56 +1000
skaller <> wrote:

> On Sun, 2004-04-25 at 03:12, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > skaller wrote:
> > >
> > > However SWIG isn't very satisfactory.. I'm thinking of
> > > writing an Ocaml program for building wrappers.
> > 
> > What is so unsatisfactory about SWIG that you would start a new effort
> > and avoid improving SWIG? 

SWIG has been burned before by adding too many languages too quickly. 
Ocaml probably wouldn't have been added as easily when you came as it was
earlier when I started my module.  Currently, we are essentially missing 
maintainers for TCL, php, and chicken scheme.  Obviously, the other
maintainers have to work harder when we need to make changes in SWIG's
core.  I do agree that dynamic loading would partially solve this problem,
by allowing modules to be pulled out into separate projects.

SWIG isn't strictly *for C*, it's for standard C++ and is not designed
to accept core C headers or GNU extensions (this is part of why it works
with incomplete type information, and missing includes).  It's assumed
that the language SWIG will process for already has a standard library,
even if it's not specifically stated.

I agree that the lack of further automation is a bottleneck for SWIG
users. I have considered forking some of the core type functions into the
ocaml module for that reason.
Hey, Adam Smith, keep your invisible hands to yourself!

To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: