Doug MacEachern wrote: > On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, Stas Bekman wrote: > > >>why do we write C functions in Foo__Bar.h files and end up with XS >>wrapper doing extra function call and sometimes doing redundant args >>conversion, instead of writing in pure XS like 1.x does? Isn't it >>slowing things down? (the extra call and conversions) >> > > its done so we are not tied to xsubpp. those functions are __inline__ so > there is no overhead of an extra function call.
ok, but what's the drawback of be tied to xsubpp if we use it anyway? I'm just trying to understand the logic behind the choice of build "architecture". > where do you see redundant args conversion? I was just thinking that if your C function wants to mess up with SVs, and the wrapper always convert these into the args C the function expect, and then in the C function to convert it back to the SV (any other Perl) type. But I guess then the function should ask for these types in first place. _____________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide http://perl.apache.org/guide mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://apachetoday.com http://eXtropia.com/ http://singlesheaven.com http://perl.apache.org http://perlmonth.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
