On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> On 02-Feb-2000 Kevin Atkinson wrote:
> >
> > Yes most certanly but I want it to be generic enough that ANY project
> > can use it. I want to use C as it the most portable and will allow pure C
> > projects to use it. Using C++ would defeat the purpose of my goals.
>
> I guess if you have a nice API in your library and it can be included in
> distributions I guess why not use it if it simplifies things! If it is
> more complicated to use then the already working functions, well ...
Well, considering I have bigger goals than LyX it might be a bit more
complicated but it should not be way more complicated. But you will
lose the convinces of C++ and some for efficacy reason you will have
to use pointers to functions for example one of my structure will
be.
typedef struct {
void * data;
const char * (* next) (void * d);
int (* at_end) (void * d);
} Emulation;
Of course you could wright a C++ wrapper for this.....
> > I want to develope a small lightweight C library that provides a uniforem
> > interface for accessing spell checkers available on the system. If aspell
> > if available, great, use it. Otherwise use ispell if thats available. If
> > not humm......
>
> Seems nice but probably we would need some API proposal on how you intend
> to make this happen. How can we say YES or NO if we only know there should
> be somewhat, but what ...???
You should get a draft soon. I am trying to get more than the LyX team
involved in this....
---
Kevin Atkinson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://metalab.unc.edu/kevina/
