Re: Socket library?
- From: Tim Caswell <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: luajit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:07:57 -0500
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:20 PM, William Adams <william_a_adams@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> I would personally find value in having that LibUV binding standalone.
>
> I was contemplating a wholesale switch to using Luvit, or grabbing the
> binding, or just doing the whole Windows layer again, without all the
> by-value callbacks.
>
> If you make the binding readily available, that will at least be one more
> option.
>
> I find the hardest part about C code is getting the projects to build
> reliably on my windows system. If you make that part really easy, bonus and
> good Karma to you.
Alright, I'll see if I have time to extract the libuv bindings into a
standalone addon I can release in source form. I personally won't be
much help getting a windows build. I've never even built luvit for
windows personally. That's 100% community provided by the awesome
guys as rackspace.
>
> -- William
> ----------------------------------------
>> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 19:12:41 -0500
>> Subject: Re: Socket library?
>> From: tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> To: luajit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> I can make my libuv bindings standalone to work with stock luajit if
>> there is value in that. The library itself will be a binary addon to
>> luajit since it will staticly include libuv and C API bindings to it.
>> (ffi can't be used for libuv since it's callback heavy and uses some
>> by-val return values and parameters)
>>
>>
Other related posts:
