From: Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...>
Date: 2008-11-04T17:30:09+09:00
Subject: Re: [ANN] FFI 0.1.1 (Foreign Function Interface) for Ruby 1.8.6/7	and 1.9

On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 06:45:27AM +0900, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> Sylvain Joyeux wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 04:54:35AM +0900, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
>>> Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
>>>> Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
>>>>> We (JRuby and Rubinius contributors) designed in the ability to   
>>>>> specify calling convention for a given library bound through FFI. 
>>>>>  Largely this was needed to support Win32's stdcall, but if 
>>>>> Linux/PPC  has a different convention and libffi supports it, 
>>>>> then FFi will too  (though we may have to add it to the list of 
>>>>> accepted conventions).
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll check on the syntax we're supporting and get back to ya.
>>>> In the body of the module you're binding:
>>>>
>>>> ffi_convention :stdcall # :default is for normal C convention
>>>>
>>>> We could add whatever convention Linux/PPC needs.
>>> Or, duh, have FFI use the appropriate default convention on the 
>>> target  platform. Either way, it should be simple to deal with.
>>
>> Thanks Charlie, but I have already my own library which does more than Ruby-FFI
>> (typelib.sf.net and typelib.sf.net/html/ruby) so I'll probably be using libffi
>> directly.
>
> Is your library compatible with JRuby? I think that's a key point for  
> Ruby FFI.
It is not -- it is mainly C++ -- but given that most of the functionality is
written in C++ *and* I use that C++ interface in other C++ programs, moving to
Ruby-FFI is not practical for me. So ...

Sylvain