On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Attila Lendvai attila@lendvai.name wrote:
for me it seems pretty ad-hoc why this one definition is included and the other C stdlib definitions are not.
if we want to include and support size_t in the CFFI contract, then why in cffi-libffi? keep in mind that it requires groveling, which is quite a heavy dependency that CFFI proper doesn't require at this point.
I suppose it was convenient for Liam. I agree it doesn't belong there. Liam, is it too much of a hassle to move the size_t grovelling to gsll? (If it is, maybe we can figure out something else.)
- why in the keyword package? (and it's another discussion why :int and other standard C definitions (not to be confused with stdlib.h) are in the keyword package, but i won't pursuit that argument at this point in time)
Re the standard CFFI types: convenience.
maybe we want to open a new ASDF system for the C stdlib that would depend on the groveler and accommodate for C stdlib definitions like errno, size_t, etc?
Maybe. Osicat sort of plays that role right now. It has size_t, and it has a bunch of errno functionality. (I don't remember if those are exported or anything.)
Should I make a bugfix release for Zach to test?