On Dec 13, 2007 6:28 PM, Shawn Rutledge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Dec 13, 2007 3:59 PM, felix winkelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yet another option is to use easyffi, which uses "define-constant" > > internally and > > which has an "export_constants" declaration. > > Do you think I should write the dbus egg with easyffi?
Let me put that another way: the dbus C API is rather fine-grained. I would like the dbus egg to be much easier to use; so each Scheme function will automate multiple steps that would be required with the C API. My impression is easyffi is mainly used to non-selectively export a Scheme binding for every function in a header. But I guess I can still keep those functions which I don't want to export into a let context and just export the ones that I want to. What's your favorite egg that is based on easyffi, as an example? _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
