On 2005-nov-15, at 15:34, James Bielman wrote:
Well, I don't see the point of using a separate translator for
callback
return values versus setting foreign variables. If I understand :TO-C
correctly, it is used when we have a Lisp value we need to convert
to a
C value with indefinite extent
On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 15:17 +, Luís Oliveira wrote:
> Or we could define yet another kind of translator, say :CALLBACK-TO-
> C, that would normally inherit from :TO-C and that in :string's case
> would use malloc. (hmm, this gives me some ideas on how to rewrite
> the type system.)
>
> Al
On 2005-nov-15, at 06:28, James Bielman wrote:
As Luis's comment in the C code portion of the callback tests
indicates,
C code that calls this callback has no reliable way to deallocate the
memory allocated implicitly by the type translator. The only way to
deallocate it is from Lisp via FOREI
Hi,
I'm finally able to spend some time on CFFI again, so I've been trying
to get caught up with the excellent progress Luis has made on the CFFI
type system.
I think I'm starting to understand how the new type translator stuff
works, but I'm a little wary of the :TO-C translation as used from
ca
