Re: Introspection API

On Fri, 2005-02-25 at 15:48 +0000, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
> > Should we make the
> >introspection api depend on libffi and offer some form of call-by-name
> >interface + the ability to register type conversion functions ? How
> >would such an api look like ?
>   Better not to create such an API, I think.  It would always be very
> much language specific.  Let each binding do its own thing.
>   Unless, and this is what I thought initially that would be done, we
> have an API to call functions using function name and GValue's.  For
> example.
>  gboolean g_call_function(const char *name, GValueArray *parameters,
> GValue *ret_val); /* returns FALSE if function failed */
>   This would be nice as it would avoid libffi altogether, at least from
> the bindings side.  But the glib introspection code would probably have
> to do GValue conversion itself and use libffi anyway, unless all API
> functions are properly registered like properties and signals are, which
> I do not see as happening any time soon, honestly.

Yes, may be nice to add something like this, even if individual language
bindings choose not to use it to avoid the GValue conversion overhead.


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