Re: Introspection API

On Thu, 2005-02-24 at 20:52 +0000, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
>On Thu, 2005-02-24 at 15:20 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>>I have written up a draft spec for the format of the binary metadata
>>to back up the repository api which I posted earlier. I hope to have
>>some initial code implementing both of these soon.
>>Comments highly appreciated,
>  OK, I probably missed something but, exactly how are language bindings
>supposed to get the actual API function pointers?  All I can see is
>function name.  Should we use dlsym() (or glib equivalent abstraction)?

c_name:   The symbol which can be used to obtain the function pointer with dlsym().

So yes.

>  Once we get the function pointer, are we supposed to use libffi to
>call the function with the actual parameters?

Hmm.  That is a problem.  Perhaps we could provide a way to easily
generate marshallers for functions in the introspection data on the
client end.  It's a little unclear to me how this would integrate into

I guess languages like Java/C# will already be using libffi or
equivalent and so this won't be an issue.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]