From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA20334; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 04:44:32 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA20138 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 04:44:31 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from hci.ucsd.edu (hci.ucsd.edu [132.239.215.210]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f3O2iUf21532 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 04:44:30 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from dsf@localhost) by hci.ucsd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA23690; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:44:26 -0700 To: Dave Berry Cc: jeanmarc.eber@lexifi.com, David Fox , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Foreign function interface generator with example s References: <3145774E67D8D111BE6E00C0DF418B6640D477@nt.kal.com> From: David Fox Date: 23 Apr 2001 19:44:26 -0700 In-Reply-To: Dave Berry's message of "Mon, 23 Apr 2001 11:32:42 +0100" Message-ID: X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.3 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk I was not aware of CamlIDL, or even of IDL itself until just now. The major difference I can see from a quick look at the docs is that the IDL system converts ML data structures into C data structures and back again for every function invocation. Mine simply allocates a string of the appropriate size for each structure and leaves it in there. Dave Berry writes: > Curiousity impels me to ask: How does David's system compare with CamlIDL? > Is there a need for an FFI interface at a lower-level than CamlIDL? I'm > interested because I've worked on FFIs for ML in the past, and we gradually > moved more and more towards IDL-based solutions. So I'd be interested to > hear what limitations people see with this approach (or with the particular > CamlIDL implementation, as I hope to use that some day). > > Dave. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: jeanmarc.eber@lexifi.com [mailto:jeanmarc.eber@lexifi.com] > Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 10:37 > > I think that an *easy* FFI (you call it "out of the box") is one of the > most important stuff to do for Ocaml. Most of us know that there aren't > any *impossibilities* (more or less anything *can* be done, but you have > to use exactly the correct macros etc...), but its not .... yes, say > "out of the box". ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr. Archives: http://caml.inria.fr