[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: NSInvocation return value location
From: |
David Ayers |
Subject: |
Re: NSInvocation return value location |
Date: |
Tue, 02 Dec 2008 09:22:44 +0100 |
Hello Ricardo,
Am Montag, den 01.12.2008, 23:12 +0100 schrieb Riccardo Mottola:
> Hi,
>
>
> > Having only one implementation would be simpler, certainly. Ffcall
> > seems to
> > be built by default (it's what I had without specifying which to
> > use). Are
> > there some platforms where only ffcall works? If not, I'd be in
> > favour of
> > deprecating it...
>
> ffcall works usually very well for me and it has some supported
> platforms which work less well with ffi.
Could you create a bug report for things that art not working with
libffi for you particular platform?
Try running the test suite, in particular base/NSProxy tests should
stress libffi/ffcall. Actually IIRC I added some expected failures for
some extremely obscure cases. I should probably deactivate them by
default somehow. So don't panic if e.g. the bit field tests fail.
> Actually, sometimes, ffcall works really well but its configure script
> gets the parameters wrong, unfortuantely upstream does not mess its
> absurd configure file.
> The NetBSD guys patched it in their pkgsrc now.... but so it goes on
> years and years of patches.
But I'm sure there is also a current libffi package for NetBSD, correct?
Cheers,
David