Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-04-23 Thread Charles Strahan
That's a possibility, but it might have to come further down the road. -Charles On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 3:29 PM, Roger Pack wrote: > > I'll need just another week or two to cut the first release. > > Maybe it can merge with mainline ffi gem at some point? > -r > > -- > Posted via http://www.rub

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-04-14 Thread Roger Pack
> I'll need just another week or two to cut the first release. Maybe it can merge with mainline ffi gem at some point? -r -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. ___ Ironruby-core mailing list Ironruby-core@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-04-04 Thread Charles Strahan
All, IronRuby FFI is coming along well. So far, I support most of the FFI::Function uses, including attaching to function pointers, library functions, and wrapping Procs. Structs are at 50%, and callbacks need to be implemented. I'll need just another week or two to cut the first release. -Cha

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-31 Thread Charles Strahan
Ryan, I'm *absolutely* interested, but, as much as it shames me to say, the ALT.NET Seattle conference wasn't on my radar until just now. I'm down for next year though, especially if you plan to give an F# workshop. -Charles On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Ryan Riley wrote: > Are you coming

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-31 Thread Ryan Riley
Are you coming to ALT.NET Seattle? We have an OSS track this year to help people learn how to contribute to projects. Interested? Ryan Sent from my iPhone On Mar 31, 2011, at 2:41 AM, Charles Strahan wrote: > Well, with some really, really ugly hacking, I've managed to get this far > (the f

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-31 Thread Charles Strahan
Well, with some really, *really *ugly hacking, I've managed to get this far (the first example from FFI wiki): irb(main):011:0> module Hello irb(main):012:1> extend FFI::Library irb(main):013:1> ffi_lib FFI::Library::LIBC irb(main):014:1> attach_function 'puts', [ :string ], :int irb(main):0

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-31 Thread Charles Strahan
> I am concerned about one thing though - we need to be able to call function > pointers, but I think that *Marshal.GetDelegateForFunctionPointer* only > supports the STD calling convention. Any thoughts on how we might support > cdecl? Presently, it's not a blocking concern - so I'll cross that b

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-25 Thread Wayne Meissner
That sounds like a good plan. Much of the CRuby version of FFI used to be written in ruby, until people had the quaint notion that it shouldn't be as slow as it was, and I moved most of the implementation into C. dlopen and friends are usually in the libdl library on most unixen. I can't remembe

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-25 Thread Charles Strahan
Sweet - thank you for the tip, Wayne! Here's my current plan: - All Ruby classes defined inside of ffi_c will be ported to Ruby, where I'll call into my C# lib where it makes sense. - Because my poor brain can only handle so much context-switching, I'll stub out all of the Ruby classe

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-24 Thread Wayne Meissner
On 25 March 2011 04:58, Charles Strahan wrote: > >> Another idea… what about starting from http://github.com/ffi and replacing >> the C extension with C# code? > > That's a great idea, Tomas.  I'll need some immediate gratification to keep > me from getting discouraged; porting the C funcs pieceme

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-24 Thread Charles Strahan
> you can also look at what JRuby is doing. >>> >>> >>> >>> Tomas >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org [mailto: >>> ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Charles Strahan >>>

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-24 Thread Charles Strahan
t;> replacing the C extension with C# code? >> >> Not sure if it will work but it’s at least worth looking at. Or perhaps >> you can also look at what JRuby is doing. >> >> >> >> Tomas >> >> >> >> *From:* ironruby-core-boun...@ru

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-24 Thread Charles Strahan
oun...@rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Charles Strahan > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 22, 2011 6:30 PM > *To:* ironruby-core@rubyforge.org > *Subject:* [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port > > > > Alright, I have a hankering again to port Ruby FFI ;). > > > >

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-22 Thread Tomas Matousek
-core-boun...@rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Charles Strahan Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 6:30 PM To: ironruby-core@rubyforge.org Subject: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port Alright, I have a hankering again to port Ruby FFI ;). One question: should the port be written in pure Ruby, or should this b

Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-22 Thread Tomas Matousek
ject: [Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port Alright, I have a hankering again to port Ruby FFI ;). One question: should the port be written in pure Ruby, or should this be a C# library in the same vein as YAML (IronRuby.Libraries.Yaml)? I was leaning towards the latter, where I would branch from Iro

[Ironruby-core] Ruby FFI port

2011-03-22 Thread Charles Strahan
Alright, I have a hankering again to port Ruby FFI ;). One question: should the port be written in pure Ruby, or should this be a C# library in the same vein as YAML (IronRuby.Libraries.Yaml)? I was leaning towards the latter, where I would branch from IronLanguages/Main, adding a *Libraries.FFI*