Re: 0.5 type system -> C++?
Martin Bayer <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.video.gephex.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> ~ Disadvantages: > ~ * C plugins and plugins in other languages not directly possible 1. The only implementation languages of gephex plugins are c and c++ at the moment. The only reasons for our c plugins were - the default language is c - compile time 2. I don't know of any successful attempt of using a different language. I tried embedding the mzscheme interpreter in a plugin. I failed cause of an unrelated weaknesses in the old plugin api. But a c or c++ api wouldn't change much of the needed code. > ~ * Compiler dependent plugins (only plugins that are compiled > ~ with a "compatible" compiler can be loaded) This should be only a problem with the win32 platform. And at the moment we don't even support cygwin or mingw. Loosing the possibility of mixing binaries from gcc and msvc on the windows platform is bad. But i my opinion the advantages overbalance this negative issue. The gephex plugin api is not and will not be a interproject plugin api. The design process of the 0.4 and later the 0.5 api was focused on abi and api compability issues. We should design our new plugin api for our needs while increasing our efforts in supporting the interproject apis like frei0r, livido and freeframe. I opt for rediscussing once again the c++ plugin interface issue. :) Martin _______________________________________________ gephex-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gephex.org/mailman/listinfo/gephex-devel
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 256 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBoMu4Cm3i57PRsbsRAsPHAKCNQW1gxm3Qrp4YSNt8PA6JKrLEYgCgxiY0 M9sSUAIL83MaDO34EqYeE3Q= =C/on -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----