Re: Why no standard foreign language interface?

Subject: Re: Why no standard foreign language interface?
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Date: 2000/02/13
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <3159472938302521@naggum.no>

* "Fernando D. Mato Mira" <matomira@iname.com>
| Erik said:
| "believe me, once you can figure out the braindamaged syntax of all these
|   stupid infix languages with a plethora of static types and other junk
|   enough to do the necessary steps of (1) writing wrapper code in that same
|   language or in C that is more friendly to a Common Lisp interface, and
|   (2) knowing enough to write foreign function interface code in Common
|   Lisp, producing output that fits one of umpteen different foreign
|   function interface definition "languages" for various Common Lisp
|   implementations is _really_ trivial."

  but Fernando read:

| "Once you figure out how to do (1) and (2) it's trivial"

  no wonder we don't communicate!

| If you want to trivially write a C++ parser in CL that would be even better!

  try a remedial reading comprehension class instead of this idiocy, will you?

| Well, C++ sucks, but the CL add-on product could know enough about the
| calling conventions of the particular C++ compiler, and about C++ syntax
| to do a lot of stuff directly, for example by leveraging your dead Lucid
| code [But don't throw loads of money at this!

  that's why I stated, and quite explicitly at that, that you need to write
  WRAPPER CODE IN THAT SAME LANGUAGE OR IN C THAT IS MORE FRIENDLY TO A
  COMMON LISP INTERFACE.  will you _please_ get it?

#:Erik