>>>>> Do you understand very well a C library and would like >>>>> Haskell to have a binding for it? (...)
> Could you perhaps then summarise what design rules you're using? Yes. They are summarised at the main module documentation: http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/bindings/0.1/doc/html/Bindings.html > For example, why did you pick the new 'Bindings' namespace? The most important guideline is: users guide guidelines. If you have a better sugestion for a base module name, please open a ticket at development website, under 'Issues/Create new issue' (you can do it as anonymous): http://bitbucket.org/mauricio/bindings > What are you doing that's different to having standalone > small packages? I'm trying to write "canonical" bindings libraries. > One risk I see is that 'bindings' will depend on a large number of C > libraries (...) Sure. I would like to have: bindings-common bindings-testsAndExamples bindings-sqlite3 bindings-openusb bindings-agar etc. But I thought I should not polute hackage before this package get at least a few people understanding and agreeing with the concept. > Maybe this is a better discussion for librar...@? OK. I'll repost there, with text updated after your thoughts. Thanks, Maurício _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
