#lisp - Mon 26 Feb 2007 between 04:22 and 04:28

XhyldazhKusually FFIs are done to system languages
redwyrmthere are pretty much no other system languages
whaleofconfusionbut Java has a lot of libraries--what if Lisp acquired them de facto
through an FFI to Java
rahulwhaleofconfusion: you're assuming that it should be easy to translate objects from random languages into lisp objects
and vice versa, maybe
XhyldazhKZhivago: i have the dump at last...
whaleofconfusioni'm sure it would be mind-numbingly hard, I'm just saying it would be nice
slavaa java ffi is not very hard
rahulwhaleofconfusion: which would make it mind-numbingly hard to figure out what is going on when you want to use it
slavasame for objective c
a c++ ffi is virtually impossible
rahula java ffi is not hard if you don't want to translate data into comparable types across ffi boundaries
slavai mean a direct interface to jni
rahulinstead of just keeping a reference to a foreign object
well, that's not particularly useful.
slavawell it is, because one can build an abstraction on top
rahulthat's just a trivial usage of an ffi to C
it's that abstraction which would be useful
whaleofconfusionI think big libraries go a long way to making a language successful
the bigger the libraries the more useful the language
XhyldazhKi agree on that
twbwhaleofconfusion: no shit
rahuldepends on if the libraries are implemented well with a good API
whaleofconfusionso that's why I think more FFI's to languages other than C would be a great thing
slavaits not like many languages are purposely built to have no libraries
often its a question of manpower
whaleofconfusionsteal the other guy's libraries
rahullots of libraries which end up being useful to no one but the original author aren't a particularly useful asset to the language community
twbwhaleofconfusion: that's often more work
rahulwhaleofconfusion: and then do what to make the library worth using?
twbConsider the hoops you need to jump through to use wxwindows in Lisp
foomsee, for example, all the broken SSL libraries for lisp
XhyldazhKa lisp for .NET would automatically benefit from all .NEt libraries
hefnerlibraries are overrated. the proper application of computing is random thought experiments that require no outside interaction whatsoever, right? =p
slavaa lisp for .net is not the same thing as a lisp with a .net ffi
rahulXhyldazhK: no it wouldn't
twbXhyldazhK: .net, or CLR?
eructateILU :)

Page: 2 9 16 23 30 37 44 51 58 65