Re: ffi dependent packaqes

Christophe,


>
>My other main concern reflects the fact that I come a little bit from a
>"cathedral" mentality: there doesn't seem to be any justification that I
>can find for the UFFI way of doing things other than "it works". While
>that's laudable in itself, it shouldn't mean that UFFI becomes a defacto
>standard (except for alphas, and openmcl, and clisp) just because of
>that, in much the same way that I don't think the Allegro URI library
>should or (shudder) clocc-port should.
>

Thanks for your comments. I hope things will improve so that you and 
others can get on board. If (like me) you want to develop 
applications that work on many platforms UFFI or something like it is 
very important. I agree that there are design and implementation 
issues to deal with, but as I Lisp programmer I should not need 5 or 
10 different ways to access the same C library.

Best,



-------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by:
ThinkGeek at http://www.ThinkGeek.com/