>>>>> "felix" == felix  <xxxxxx@call-with-current-continuation.org> writes:

felix> Hm, you probably misunderstood: I'm not talking about making a SWIG-like
felix> FFI-tool mandatory, I merely defined a language (quite similar to the
felix> approach taken by SRFI-7), that specifies blocks of foreign code, plus
felix> the types of the argument and result values.

That's pretty much what CIG was.  (Not SWIG ...)

felix> How exactly this is processed, or wether an external tool is
felix> used, is not relevant.

To be sure, what you propose may certainly be useful (even though I
suspect it'll be less useful than you think), but *this* SRFI is
exactly about "how this is processed" rather than what the language
for specifying things is.  The idea is that you can then specify
languages like the one you propose, and write portable tools for
processing them.  One step at a time.

--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla