Re: when GC is permitted Michael Sperber (11 Jan 2004 12:14 UTC)
Re: when GC is permitted Michael Sperber 11 Jan 2004 12:14 UTC
>>>>> "Matthew" == Matthew Dempsky <email@example.com> writes:
Matthew> Michael Sperber <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> - Many (but not all) Scheme systems can quite easily support it,
>> because it already matches the FFI they have currently.
>> - There's lots of experience with this kind of FFI, and it's proven
>> to work (for Scheme systems supporting it) for hooking up a wide
>> variety of C libraries.
Matthew> Both of these points rest on the issue of "Scheme systems that support
Matthew> it" and I have an uneasy feeling about that. I would be more
Matthew> comfortable with a C FFI SRFI that could be supported by any Scheme
Sure, we all would be. You deleted the part of my post that referred
to that. The point is that many Scheme systems *already* support a
Matthew> That doesn't help implementations that can _only_ provide a Pika-style
Matthew> or JNI-style FFI, however. Instead code will be written to support
Matthew> the present FFI and will need to be rewritten before they can be of
Matthew> any use to other implementations that couldn't provide this FFI.
Again, I referred to lots of code that *already* is written for a
SRFI-50-style FFI, and that would need to be rewritten anyway for a
JNI- or Pika-style FFI.
Matthew> I'm mildly confused by this last statement -- are the intentions still
Matthew> to finalize SRFI-50 without resolving the issues brought up on the
Matthew> mailing list [...]
I'm mildly confused by your statement. We haven't formulated our
intention yet. However, as Richard has explained, it is so far not
our intention to change SRFI 50 into a Pika- or JNI-style FFI.
Matthew> It's my understanding that any existing final SRFI _could_ be
Matthew> implemented by every Scheme implementation with primarily minor
Matthew> changes -- most can even be implemented entirely in Scheme.
That's understanding is mistaken. A short look reveals at least:
to have the same property. A more strict interpretation would yield
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, VÃ¶lkerverstÃ¤ndigung und Ã¼berhaupt blabla