26.05.2015, 11:38, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
Le mardi 26 mai 2015 10:13:49, Tamas Szekeres a écrit :
Hi Ari,
I haven't tried to compile that with mono for quite a long time. I'll give
it a try.
However we did not follow the latest changes in the SWIG implementation
with the bindings, so I'd try with an earlier version (ie. 1.3.39) to
generate the wrappers.
I can confirm that I can compile the CSharp bindings on Linux with SWIG 1.3.40
(and run the tests), but I get the same error as Ari with SWIG 2.0.X
As far as I know, Java and Python bindings build and run equaly well with SWIG
1.3.40 or 2.0.X (although there's a Unix makefile hack to have Python 3.2
compat, conditionnaly applied with SWIG 1.3.40, that is no longer needed with
SWIG 2.0.4 or later)
Swig 1.3.39 seems questionable. Just look at the download amounts at
sourceforge. 1.3.39 one download and 1.3.40 148 downloads per week.
However, 1.3.39 does *not* put the PVINVOKE() method twice into the
PVINVOKE.cs file.
May be we should consider including the generated
wrappers in gdal instead of let the users to use different versions with
different results.
It would be good if we could have a common SWIG version that works for all the
bindings. So currently it seems to be 1.3.40 ?
Regarding putting the generated wrappers in SVN, that's already what we do for
Python. We could also just include the generated wrappers in the tarballs.
IMO "users" = people who use ready-made packages. Developers and
packagers should be intelligent enough to use development tools. I don't
like the idea of having generated files in source repositories. I'm also
of the opinion that there should be a really good reason to use an old
version of a common tool. And at least in my Linux (Mint, Maya - hmm,
that seems already pretty old, I should upgrade) swig 2.0.11 is the
current. But that's just me I guess.
Ari
Even
_______________________________________________
gdal-dev mailing list
gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
