This is the mail archive of the guile@cygnus.com mailing list for the guile project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
>>>>> "C" == Clifford Beshers <beshers@cs.columbia.edu> writes: C> (new-constant 'VNULL "NULL" 'VEC) ;; null-vector C> I'm suggesting that this should look like: C> (new-constant 'VNULL 'VEC "NULL") C> This would be more like the C declaration, as with the C> new-function syntax below. This makes sense to me. C> I like the idea of using the same order as C. It makes the C> generation of the g-wrap input file easier, for one thing. C> Following this rule, a global C declaration like: C> /* const */ int global_state = 42; C> should be wrapped with: C> (new-constant 'global-state 'int "global_state") C> Doesn't that follow your rule? Yes -- but note that the intent of new-constant is that it should really export _constants_, so (new-constant 'global-state 'int "42") would be more appropriate (although a constant state value is not too interesting). I don't have a way of exporting C variables in G-Wrap -- although exporting getter and setting functions for C variables is trivial. -Chris