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] |
> Therefore I'd like if the new record type could be "mapped" over an > application struct and if it would enable Scheme level access to > binary data. One problem I see with this is that the offsets of the fields end up appearing explicitly in C code. Those offsets will change from one architecture to the next. You're also duplicating the description of the structure --- you've got the actual C declaration in the header file, and then the Scheme declaration. I suppose the same is true of the Perl "pack" and "unpack" functions, but it would be nicer to talk about this stuff in the context of a more robust framework, where everything was generated from the structure description in the C source code. I think this all relates to FFI stuff, which is really just a subset of the grand problem of How To Describe Interfaces.