Re: Migrating from UFFI to CFFI

On Tue, 08 Oct 2013 23:21:08 +0300, Russ Tyndall <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello Victor,
>
> Actually the work is done and CLSQL supports running over UFFI or CFFI.
> We also ran into some cases where UFFI was not as performant or had
> errors and have been running under CFFI in production sites for quite
> some time.  The solution outlined below requires the CFFI-UFFI-COMPAT
> library (quicklisp).
>
> To enable CFFI you must require :clsql-cffi before any of the specific
> backends.  Once that is done, you may require :clsql-odbc etc.
> Oddly, I notice that we are not depending on CFFI-UFFI-COMPAT (which is
> probably a bug), so you may have to depend on that separately.
> Something like `:depend-on '(:cffi-uffi-compat :clsql-cffi :clsql-odbc)`
> in your asd should get you going using CFFI.  Please do report any bugs
> or troubles you experience.
>
> Cheers and hope this helps,

Hi Russ,

thanks for your advice. So far I can load UFFI-compat by manually
loading required packages in the REPL:

| (ql:quickload :cffi-uffi-compat)
| (ql:quickload :clsql-cffi)
| (ql:quickload :clsql-sqlite3)

But I did not figure out yet how to achieve the same result with
depends-on.

However, the real problem currently is that the program gets into an
UNDEFINED-FUNCTION error:

| debugger invoked on a UNDEFINED-FUNCTION in thread
| #<THREAD "hunchentoot-worker-127.0.0.1:38567" RUNNING {E5A0849}>:
|   The function CFFI-UFFI-COMPAT::LOOKUP-FOREIGN-ENCODING is undefined.

it looks like cffi_0.11.2 (that is currently present in my quicklisp
dist) is not up to date with the most recent UFFI API. I will take a
look if I can fix it myself.

However, I still believe it would be preferable to avoid piling up
redundand compatibility layers and replace UFFI with CFFI completely.

Are there any such plans or ongoing projects?

Thanks,
Victor





> Russ Tyndall
> Acceleration.net
>
>
>
> On 10/8/2013 10:00 AM, Victor wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> CLSQL currently relies on the UFFI for the native interface. I
>> understand that both CLSQL and UFFI were developed by Kevin. But
>> apparently CFFI is considered to be better maintained due to larger
>> user base. And I am afraid that I've stuck into some issues caused by
>> UFFI.
>>
>> Are there any plans or ongoing projects to migrate CLSQL from UFFI to
>> CFFI?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Victor
>> _______________________________________________
>> CLSQL mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.b9.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clsql
>
> _______________________________________________
> CLSQL mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.b9.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clsql
>


-- 
Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito --- LvM