[nanomsg] Re: RFC: Error code query API
- From: Charles Remes <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:00:04 -0500
Yes, the Ruby binding would be able to take advantage of this. I hate all of
that copy/paste work; it leads to stupid errors (on my part).
cr
On Mar 14, 2013, at 7:29 AM, Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2013-03-14 13:21, Charles Remes wrote:
>> I like Martin's idea about the library providing a list of all known
>> symbols.
>
> Ok. So Ruby binding would be able to take advantage of the function and avoid
> copy-pasting all symbols from the header file to the binding source code.
> Right?
>
>> Wouldn't the API for such a thing be simpler if it returned
>> an array of char* containing all of the symbol names? A binding could
>> create all of its local constants from this list and use
>> nn_symbol(name) to look up the associated integer code too.
>> e.g.
>> void nn_symbols(char **list, int *length)
>
> From the C point of view this is the easiest option. I've proposed an
> alternative function (iterating over symbols) because I wasn't sure whether
> FFI subsystems in different language are able to handle variable-sized arrays
> of strings. It's quite a complex type, after all.
>
> Martin
>
Other related posts:
