digitalmars.D - Deimos projects for Clang and Ruby
- Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> Feb 03 2012
- "Jakob Øvrum" <jakobovrum gmail.com> Feb 03 2012
- Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> Feb 03 2012
- David Nadlinger <see klickverbot.at> Feb 03 2012
- Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> Feb 04 2012
- David Nadlinger <see klickverbot.at> Feb 04 2012
- Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> Feb 04 2012
- Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> Feb 04 2012
- Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> Feb 04 2012
- Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> Feb 04 2012
- "Ludovic Silvestre" <ludovic.silvestre gmail.com> Feb 03 2012
- Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> Feb 03 2012
- "Martin Nowak" <dawg dawgfoto.de> Feb 03 2012
I would like to open two Deimos projects, one for Clang and one for Ruby. Actually it would be for libclang and libruby. Clang: http://clang.llvm.org/ "A C language family frontend for LLVM" Ruby: http://www.ruby-lang.org "A dynamic, open source programming language with a focus on simplicity and productivity. It has an elegant syntax that is natural to read and easy to write." -- /Jacob Carlborg
Feb 03 2012
On Friday, 3 February 2012 at 09:38:38 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:Ruby: http://www.ruby-lang.org "A dynamic, open source programming language with a focus on simplicity and productivity. It has an elegant syntax that is natural to read and easy to write."
If the Ruby API is suitable for Deimos; I am maintaining the Lua 5.1 API over at the LuaD project[1]. I wouldn't mind maintaining it for Deimos, apparently the pure Lua C bindings are quite popular despite my best efforts at creating an efficient but high-level wrapper :) [1] https://github.com/JakobOvrum/LuaD
Feb 03 2012
On 2012-02-03 13:36, Jakob Øvrum wrote:On Friday, 3 February 2012 at 09:38:38 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:Ruby: http://www.ruby-lang.org "A dynamic, open source programming language with a focus on simplicity and productivity. It has an elegant syntax that is natural to read and easy to write."
If the Ruby API is suitable for Deimos; I am maintaining the Lua 5.1 API over at the LuaD project[1]. I wouldn't mind maintaining it for Deimos, apparently the pure Lua C bindings are quite popular despite my best efforts at creating an efficient but high-level wrapper :) [1] https://github.com/JakobOvrum/LuaD
I think it would be useful to have Ruby bindings in Deimos. I don't see how it can be negative at all, to have in Deimos. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Feb 03 2012
On 2/3/12 1:49 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:I think it would be useful to have Ruby bindings in Deimos. I don't see how it can be negative at all, to have in Deimos.
If the library in question is reasonably well known, I don't think there should be any doubt at all as to whether we want headers in Deimos or not. David
Feb 03 2012
On 2012-02-03 17:32, David Nadlinger wrote:On 2/3/12 1:49 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:I think it would be useful to have Ruby bindings in Deimos. I don't see how it can be negative at all, to have in Deimos.
If the library in question is reasonably well known, I don't think there should be any doubt at all as to whether we want headers in Deimos or not. David
You can't say that Ruby isn't well known. Neither Clang btw. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Feb 04 2012
David Nadlinger <see klickverbot.at> On 2/4/12 6:59 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:On 2012-02-03 17:32, David Nadlinger wrote:On 2/3/12 1:49 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:I think it would be useful to have Ruby bindings in Deimos. I don't see how it can be negative at all, to have in Deimos.
If the library in question is reasonably well known, I don't think there should be any doubt at all as to whether we want headers in Deimos or not. David
You can't say that Ruby isn't well known. Neither Clang btw.
Yeah, but did I? David
Feb 04 2012
On 2/3/2012 8:32 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:On 2/3/12 1:49 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:I think it would be useful to have Ruby bindings in Deimos. I don't see how it can be negative at all, to have in Deimos.
If the library in question is reasonably well known, I don't think there should be any doubt at all as to whether we want headers in Deimos or not.
Right, and that indeed is Deimos' mission. I'll get the projects opened.
Feb 04 2012
On 2012-02-04 21:04, Walter Bright wrote:On 2/3/2012 8:32 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:On 2/3/12 1:49 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:I think it would be useful to have Ruby bindings in Deimos. I don't see how it can be negative at all, to have in Deimos.
If the library in question is reasonably well known, I don't think there should be any doubt at all as to whether we want headers in Deimos or not.
Right, and that indeed is Deimos' mission. I'll get the projects opened.
I see that you've created the projects, thanks. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Feb 04 2012
On 2012-02-03 17:26, Iain Buclaw wrote:On 3 February 2012 12:49, Jacob Carlborg<doob me.com> wrote:On 2012-02-03 13:36, Jakob Øvrum wrote:On Friday, 3 February 2012 at 09:38:38 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:Ruby: http://www.ruby-lang.org "A dynamic, open source programming language with a focus on simplicity and productivity. It has an elegant syntax that is natural to read and easy to write."
If the Ruby API is suitable for Deimos; I am maintaining the Lua 5.1 API over at the LuaD project[1]. I wouldn't mind maintaining it for Deimos, apparently the pure Lua C bindings are quite popular despite my best efforts at creating an efficient but high-level wrapper :) [1] https://github.com/JakobOvrum/LuaD
I think it would be useful to have Ruby bindings in Deimos. I don't see how it can be negative at all, to have in Deimos.
If your doing Ruby, I'll have to step up and do Perl!!! :o)
Pearl, Oh NOOOoo. Ok, as long as you let me do Ruby I let you do Perl :) -- /Jacob Carlborg
Feb 04 2012
On 2/3/2012 8:12 AM, Ludovic Silvestre wrote:If I'm not mistaken, your wrapper already uses the pure Lua C bindings, the modules in the luad.c package. If that's the case, you could divide your project into 2 sub-projects: - Pure Lua C bindings (deimos.lua instead of luad.c) - High-level D wrapper (luad)
Right, the Deimos project should only be the pure C bindings.
Feb 04 2012
If I'm not mistaken, your wrapper already uses the pure Lua C bindings, the modules in the luad.c package. If that's the case, you could divide your project into 2 sub-projects: - Pure Lua C bindings (deimos.lua instead of luad.c) - High-level D wrapper (luad) On Friday, 3 February 2012 at 12:36:38 UTC, Jakob Øvrum wrote:On Friday, 3 February 2012 at 09:38:38 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:Ruby: http://www.ruby-lang.org "A dynamic, open source programming language with a focus on simplicity and productivity. It has an elegant syntax that is natural to read and easy to write."
If the Ruby API is suitable for Deimos; I am maintaining the Lua 5.1 API over at the LuaD project[1]. I wouldn't mind maintaining it for Deimos, apparently the pure Lua C bindings are quite popular despite my best efforts at creating an efficient but high-level wrapper :) [1] https://github.com/JakobOvrum/LuaD
Feb 03 2012
On 3 February 2012 12:49, Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> wrote:On 2012-02-03 13:36, Jakob =D8vrum wrote:On Friday, 3 February 2012 at 09:38:38 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:Ruby: http://www.ruby-lang.org "A dynamic, open source programming language with a focus on simplicity and productivity. It has an elegant syntax that is natural to read and easy to write."
If the Ruby API is suitable for Deimos; I am maintaining the Lua 5.1 API over at the LuaD project[1]. I wouldn't mind maintaining it for Deimos, apparently the pure Lua C bindings are quite popular despite my best efforts at creating an efficient but high-level wrapper :) [1] https://github.com/JakobOvrum/LuaD
I think it would be useful to have Ruby bindings in Deimos. I don't see h=
it can be negative at all, to have in Deimos.
If your doing Ruby, I'll have to step up and do Perl!!! :o) --=20 Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) =3D (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Feb 03 2012
On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:32:42 +0100, David Nadlinger <see klickverbot.at> wrote:On 2/3/12 1:49 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:I think it would be useful to have Ruby bindings in Deimos. I don't see how it can be negative at all, to have in Deimos.
If the library in question is reasonably well known, I don't think there should be any doubt at all as to whether we want headers in Deimos or not. David
We shouldn't really have much restrictions on what to add to deimos. But I think examples/tests should become mandatory.
Feb 03 2012