Hi all,
I've noticed that cffi-grovel has (recently?) been superseded (along with the rest of cffi-net) by iolib-grovel. I've been using cffi-grovel for a while now and am
My current thoughts are that a) cffi-grovel is a nice descriptive name and b) this is the kind of package that should be asdf-install'able on it's own.
Are there any plans for liberating cffi-grovel and making it standalone project?
Cheers, Sean.
Sean rosssd@gmail.com writes:
Are there any plans for liberating cffi-grovel and making it standalone project?
I plan to work on cleaning cffi-grovel up, document it and integrate it with CFFI (as a separate ASDF system) as part of my Summer of Code project[1]. Now's a great time to let me know of any problems you'd like to see fixed or features you'd like to see added!
[1] http://kvardek-du.kerno.org/2007/04/sweet-summer-of-lisp.html
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 12:32 +0100, Luis Oliveira wrote:
I plan to work on cleaning cffi-grovel up, document it and integrate it with CFFI (as a separate ASDF system) as part of my Summer of Code project[1]. Now's a great time to let me know of any problems you'd like to see fixed or features you'd like to see added!
I have a few patches which may be useful. The first is Lispworks support , the second is allowing a default keyword value for constants (which is quote possibly the wrong thing) and the third is support for windows (using the dmc[1] compiler). Please give me a shout if you are interested in any of these patches and I'll cobble together a diff or 3.
As far as features go number one would be the ability to specify a default generated lisp file if, for example, the specified compiler is not available or compilation fails (which given that most people don't have many headers available on Windows system could be quite useful).
Cheers, Sean.
[1] http://www.digitalmars.com/download/freecompiler.html
Sean rosssd@gmail.com writes:
I have a few patches which may be useful. The first is Lispworks support , the second is allowing a default keyword value for constants (which is quote possibly the wrong thing) and the third is support for windows (using the dmc[1] compiler). Please give me a shout if you are interested in any of these patches and I'll cobble together a diff or 3.
Please do! To this list, cffi-devel, or my email address, whichever you prefer. :-)
As far as features go number one would be the ability to specify a default generated lisp file if, for example, the specified compiler is not available or compilation fails (which given that most people don't have many headers available on Windows system could be quite useful).
Indeed, this is particularly useful for windows. I suppose adding support for VC++ might be useful too. I will look into that.
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 03:05:49PM +0100, Sean wrote:
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 12:32 +0100, Luis Oliveira wrote:
I plan to work on cleaning cffi-grovel up, document it and integrate it with CFFI (as a separate ASDF system) as part of my Summer of Code project[1]. Now's a great time to let me know of any problems you'd like to see fixed or features you'd like to see added!
I have a few patches which may be useful. The first is Lispworks support , the second is allowing a default keyword value for constants (which is quote possibly the wrong thing) and the third is support for windows (using the dmc[1] compiler). Please give me a shout if you are interested in any of these patches and I'll cobble together a diff or 3.
wonderful :) , just try to send one feature per patch, one patch per email so that they can be discussed separately
As far as features go number one would be the ability to specify a default generated lisp file if, for example, the specified compiler is not available or compilation fails (which given that most people don't have many headers available on Windows system could be quite useful).
I don't understand, what do you accomplish this way ?
As far as features go number one would be the ability to specify a default generated lisp file if, for example, the specified compiler is not available or compilation fails (which given that most people don't have many headers available on Windows system could be quite useful).
I don't understand, what do you accomplish this way ?
well, currently to grovel the constants on win32 for sockets you will need to have at least 3 header files available. (include "winsock2.h") (include "WTYPES.h") (include "ws2tcpip.h")
I wouldn't expect a reasonable socket library for CL to require you to have a C compiler and the appropriate header files downloaded from MS (IIRC the full download is 100MB or so, or a while trying to find the correct header files) in order to be compiled and loaded.
Granted this problem is mainly a windows one but I think that's a platform that should be targeted.
Cheers, Sean.
I know it is late coming but here is one of the promised patches.
This adds support for Lispworks to cffi-grovel.
More to follow.
Cheers, Sean.
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 02:04:42PM +0100, Sean wrote:
I know it is late coming but here is one of the promised patches.
This adds support for Lispworks to cffi-grovel.
could you make the patch against iolib-posix ? you seem here to have patched cffi-net instead; also this patch is reversed, it removes code instead of adding you can find download instructions here: http://common-lisp.net/project/iolib/download.shtml
--- /share/lisp/asdf-install/site/cffi-net-R8/cffi-grovel.lisp 2007-04-17 16:27:15.000000000 +0100 +++ cffi-grovel.lisp 2006-06-07 05:00:09.000000000 +0100 @@ -70,14 +70,6 @@ (defun invoke (command &rest args) args message))))
-#+lispworks -(defun invoke (command &rest args)
- (let ((exit-code (system:call-system-showing-output (format nil "~A ~{~A~^ ~}" command args))))
- (unless (zerop exit-code)
(error "External process exited with code ~S.~@Command was: ~S~{ ~S~}"exit-code command args))))(defun name-designator-c (designator) (etypecase designator (list (nth 0 designator))
-
Luis Oliveira -
Sean -
Stelian Ionescu