Subject: Re: Why no standard foreign language interface?
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: 2000/02/15
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* "Fernando D. Mato Mira" <>
| I was going to write:
| "Once you figure X in order to see how to do (1) and (2) it's trivial"

  once again, you have missed what "it" refers to.  I'm tiring of this.

| Obviously, you have to "figure out X" if you're going to
| "figure out how to do (1) and (2)"
| Anyway, Erik says:
| "Figuring out the C++ syntax takes infinite time so, relatively speaking,
| implementing a mapping is trivial"

  what I did in fact say, you George W. Bush you, was that once you got the
  information, _which_ particular form the FFI glue code should take is
  trivial.  the argument, since you missed it completely, was against
  having a _standard_ FFI form, since that is such a trivial piece of the
  whole equation.  do you get it _now_?

  I realize that some people are so devoid of ethics as to pretend that
  other people said things they never did simply by putting those funny ""
  characters around any damn lie they want, but I take exception to that,
  and I take exception to the whole personality of people who are so
  mind-bogglingly unware of their own actions as not to realize that they
  are doing this kind of shit.

  go away, Fernando D. Mato Mira.