On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 03:12:49 +0900, Eric Kow wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 19:28:06 +0200, Mads Lindstrøm wrote:
>> I link to Huber's langauge-c
>> http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/language-c
>> for those who want to check it out.
>>
>> Anyway, can we do with a C parse
On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 19:28:06 +0200, Mads Lindstrøm wrote:
> I link to Huber's langauge-c
> http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/language-c
> for those who want to check it out.
>
> Anyway, can we do with a C parser? Won't we need a C++ parser?
I guess that depends if tho
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 13:59 +0100, Eric Kow wrote:
> Whoops, maybe it's not a good idea to apply this...
>
> I was trying to get rid of external definitions like this
> > -wxEVT_COMMAND_BUTTON_CLICKED : INTEGER is
> > - external "C use %"ewxw_glue.h%""
> > - alias "expEVT_C
Whoops, maybe it's not a good idea to apply this...
I was trying to get rid of external definitions like this
> -wxEVT_COMMAND_BUTTON_CLICKED : INTEGER is
> - external "C use %"ewxw_glue.h%""
> - alias "expEVT_COMMAND_BUTTON_CLICKED"
> - end
But not constan
This would be a first step in simplifying the auto-generation of the wxcore
stuff.
One thing I'm wondering though is do we really have to define these in
Eiffel? If we could rewrite them in C, it would make things feel a little
less exotic. Better yet, some of these constants appear to be define
