From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: Why no standard foreign language interface? Date: 2000/02/11 Message-ID: <3159296652595081@naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 584751613 References: <38A1C047.148D6466@raytheon.com> <3159120499145849@naggum.no> <38A1F68E.F218AB44@raytheon.com> <3159133748798780@naggum.no> <38A2A10B.50E08863@iname.com> mail-copies-to: never Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 950311264 10997 195.0.192.66 (11 Feb 2000 23:21:04 GMT) Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879 or +1 510 435 8604; fax: +47 2210 9077; http://www.naggum.no User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Feb 2000 23:21:04 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * "Fernando D. Mato Mira" | Automatic FFI generation from C++ header files is far from trivial. it may help to read what I write if you want to pose counter-arguments to it instead of counter-arguments to something I didn't say. C++ sucks. to interface to C++, you need wrapper code in C++ that makes it possible to interface Common Lisp to the wrapper code. this code may well be strictly C-compatible, as in `extern "C"'. | For C, you can easily write a FFIGEN `backend' adapted to your CL | implementation. That's true. so what prohibits you from being smart and utilizing this fact when dealing with the utter braindamage of C++? my answer: nothing. it's better to waste time in wrapper code than on stupid programmer tricks. #:Erik