[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Dynamic FFI vs Static FFI (was Re: About Guile crypto support)
From: |
William ML Leslie |
Subject: |
Re: Dynamic FFI vs Static FFI (was Re: About Guile crypto support) |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Feb 2013 18:21:41 +1100 |
On 13 February 2013 05:24, Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> wrote:
> Okay, but here I'm using "Static FFI" to mean something very different
> than the C API: I'm talking about a pure scheme-based API that would be
> quite similar to the API our current dynamic FFI, except that a lot of
> the work would be done at compilation time (probably during macro
> expansion).
Maybe even something like LuaJIT FFI or python's CFFI - that can parse
C code at compile time to produce the data structures for the dynamic
FFI?
--
William Leslie
- Re: About Guile crypto support, (continued)
- Re: About Guile crypto support, Ludovic Courtès, 2013/02/11
- Re: About Guile crypto support, Nala Ginrut, 2013/02/11
- Re: About Guile crypto support, Greg Troxel, 2013/02/11
- Re: About Guile crypto support, Daniel Hartwig, 2013/02/11
- Re: About Guile crypto support, Nala Ginrut, 2013/02/11
- Re: About Guile crypto support, Daniel Hartwig, 2013/02/12
- Dynamic FFI vs Static FFI (was Re: About Guile crypto support), Mark H Weaver, 2013/02/12
- Re: Dynamic FFI vs Static FFI (was Re: About Guile crypto support), Ludovic Courtès, 2013/02/12
- Re: Dynamic FFI vs Static FFI (was Re: About Guile crypto support), Mark H Weaver, 2013/02/12
- Re: Dynamic FFI vs Static FFI (was Re: About Guile crypto support), Ludovic Courtès, 2013/02/12
- Re: Dynamic FFI vs Static FFI (was Re: About Guile crypto support),
William ML Leslie <=
- Re: Dynamic FFI vs Static FFI (was Re: About Guile crypto support), Nala Ginrut, 2013/02/15