On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 09:39 +0000, Dominic Evans wrote: > Hi Alan, > > -----Alan Conway <acon...@redhat.com> wrote: ----- > > I plan to start working on a "go" <golang.org> binding for proton. I > > envisage a SWIG binding similar to the other swig-based bindings > > (python, ruby, etc.) and an API layer similar to the new reactive > > Python API (based on the C reactor.) > > > > This will be an exploratory effort to begin with, I'd like to hear > > from anybody who might be interested in using such a thing or helping > > to implement it. > > This is certainly something I'd be interested in. However, as far as I was > aware, the usefulness of SWIG for Go was where you needed to wrapper C++ > libraries. > > If you're just planning on wrapping the proton-c reactor code, wouldn't we > simply use cgo [1]?
Maybe. The go docs mention both swig and cgo. My initial assumption was that since we already have a well defined swig layer that is used by everything else, that probably would make sense. However I haven't looked at cgo in detail yet so if it has big advantages over swig then it is a possibility. Cheers, Alan.
