From: Luc Heinrich <luc@...>
Date: 2008-12-16T00:06:12+09:00
Subject: Re: Standardizing FFI based wrappers

On 11 déc. 08, at 16:03, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

> I like ffi- prefix for all "simple" ffi wrapper gems.

I haved pushed a basic wrapper of zlib to GitHub, it's pretty simple  
and not fully tested yet, but if you guys want to use it as an example  
for more discussions, feel free :)

<http://github.com/lucsky/ffi-zlib/tree/master>

One thing I noticed while doing this, for example, is that you still  
have to refer to the original zlib header(s) to figure out what the  
function parameters are exactly, since the attach_function calls only  
mention the types. You would probably still have to check the  
documentation for behavior explanations but if the parameter names  
would at least be available somewhere it would probably make things  
easier.

So is it ok to simply redirect the wrapper user to the library  
headers ? Or do we want a standard way to comment the function  
wrappers too ?

-- 
Luc Heinrich - luc@honk-honk.com