> > Seems that 'scheme-bytestructures' can be used to implement something like
> > `define-foreign-struct', but since it is not currently part of Guile, I,
> > sure,
> > can't depend on it.
> >
> > Also, 'parse-c-struct' provides similiar functionality.
>
> I was keeping an eye on this thread because it sounded like something
> bytestructures could help in. Tell me if you need cooperation; I'm the
> author of bytestructures.
>
> I'm not sure if the Guile maintainers would like to make bytestructures
> a part of Guile as it stands, but I have my FSF copyright assignment
> paperwork done and from my side all is fine. John Cowan wants to make
> it a SRFI for possible adoption in R7RS-large, which would have some
> implications on future design and implementation choices in the project
> (e.g. not making it dependent on any Guile-specific concepts) but I'll
> prioritize Guile if I'm forced to make choices.
Glad to meet cooperation. I think we will return to this question when
* (system foreign declarative) is incorporated into Guile
* (system foreign declarative) will get need to support C structures
due need to write bindings to some external library.
25 patches is already a lot for maintainers to review, and I would
prefer to not scare maintaners further.
A bit offtopic question: am I correct, that there is no way to write
bindings (purely from Guile, no C) to functions, that accept struct
arguments by value?
struct foo { int x; double y; };
void frob(const struct foo);
--
Accept: text/plain, text/x-diff
Accept-Language: eo,en,ru
X-Web-Site: sinsekvu.github.io
