On 16 Dec 2011, at 10:49, Igor Stasenko wrote: >> > oh please. that's even less obvious usage :) > there's a lot of different stuff in C syntax which you can play with. > But it doesn't means that you need to routinely support > everything in FFI callout specs. > > as i said, the function signature syntax are close to C syntax, but > not strictly C.
Igor, what is your goal with that? Have something working, or have something usable? If your goal is to have something usable, then your direct competitor is LuaJIT2's FFI http://luajit.org/ext_ffi.html and you should show similar ambitions. (Note specifically the 'cut&past part') Otherwise, it will always remain just a nice try, an experiment that never got finished/productized. My understanding is that your boss got other plans for Pharo... Best regards Stefan -- Stefan Marr Software Languages Lab Vrije Universiteit Brussel Pleinlaan 2 / B-1050 Brussels / Belgium http://soft.vub.ac.be/~smarr Phone: +32 2 629 2974 Fax: +32 2 629 3525
