On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Allan Rae wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Kevin Atkinson wrote:
> If you try to design your library in C using OO techniques then you will
> probably find it becomes considerably less useful and maintainable than if
> you implemented it as C++ and provided a simple wrapper interface in C.
My code is in C++. The wrapper interface will be in C but it will be
a bit more than a wrapper as I want it also to resort to using Ispell if
Aspell is not available to increase portability. This is where I want
LyX team help. Provide the ispell part. Naturally this wrapper will be a
separate library that is not part of aspell and should be small enough
that programs that want to use it can include it with there distribution.
> I'm no expert in wrapping code so you might like to consider approaching
> the KDE and gtk-- teams for suggestions about writing in C++ and providing
> a thin C wrapper. If you do so you should also include the draft of the
> spellchecker classes that you came up with last year as a possible
> interface so they have some idea of what you would be doing.
Actually I just sent an email to the g++ mailing list about this....
> As part of your plan for spell-checker world domination would you be
> making a library implementation of aspell? If so that might be the best
> interface to start with since it would be more elaborate than ispell would
> require. Then you'd only have to figure out how to wrap the C++ with C.
> It's got to be easier than the reverse.
Um, absolutely. Aspell IS a library, but, it is undocumented because the
library is in a constant state of flux. I seam to redesign a major part
of it with each new release. I am really hopping things will settle down
soon.
Sorry if I was massively unclear.
---
Kevin Atkinson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://metalab.unc.edu/kevina/
