[maemo-developers] [maemo-developers] Ignored patches, ignored bugs

From: Marius Vollmer marius.vollmer at nokia.com
Date: Wed Jan 24 15:01:09 EET 2007
"ext Kalle Vahlman" <kalle.vahlman at gmail.com> writes:

> 2007/1/24, Marius Vollmer <marius.vollmer at nokia.com>:
>> "ext maemo-developers-bounces at maemo.org" <maemo-developers-bounces at maemo.org> writes:
>> > Maybe the list of important bugs for hildon-fm is just too long to get
>> > the easy patches fixed right now ;)
>> Yep, the C++ bindings are unfortunately pretty low priority for me.
>> As far as language bindings go, C++ doesn't need them (people can just
>> use the C API from C++).
> You can write a C module and import that to Python too, no need for bindings.
> Oh, wait, that WAS the binding. IMO the situation is very much the
> same for C++, though it's of course much easier to include C in C++
> than in Python.

It's not entirely the same.  Python and other higher level languages
have different type systems and manage memory differently than C.
Cleanly wrapping a C API for such a language needs support from the C
API most of the time.  Gtk+ has tons of this support, and hildon-fm
should have it, too.

C++ on the other hand can use C APIs unwrapped.

I am happy to heavy significant Perl trickery into the build system to
generate run-time type information about enumerations.  But changing

  typedef struct { ... } foo;


  typedef struct _foo foo; struct foo { ... };

for the benefit of C++ bindings?  Come on.  That seems ill-motivated
to me.

> It still doesn't invalidate the need for bindings.

There is no need for C++ bindings.  It is nice to have them, tho.

> I guess we'll thank you for it. Eventually.

:-)  Do it now!  I applied the patch.

More information about the maemo-developers mailing list