chicken-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback


From: john
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] Idea feedback
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:59:23 +0000

So create another shared library which uses the Chicken shared library
which then provides the clean API and hides other functionality away
from the C app! You are right that does seem more straight forward
then trying to separate and use inter-process communication. Oh well,
I need to find another reason to play with D-Bus I guess.

Thanks Elf.

On 15/02/2008, Elf <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
>  On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, john wrote:
>
>
> > This is what I do now. I actually package Chicken for the mobile which
>  > installs the shared library. I was looking at a cleaner separation so
>  > one app remained C without FFI code (or knowledge of Chicken) the
>  > other remained Chicken (with knowledge of D-Bus). The interface
>  > between the two being D-Bus. I am quite possibly trying to over
>  > engineer something here but interested in the alternatives to
>  > embedding. I would like to tell John Doe, you write this C app that
>  > talks to D-Bus. John Doe is happy as he knows how to talk to D-Bus
>  > from his C app and has never heard of Chicken or Scheme or
>  > s-expressions. John Doe does not need to care beyond that point how
>  > the data is encoded/sent/decoded/received and can build his app the
>  > way he knows how.
>  >
>
>
> way overengineered.  just wrap the chicken lib in a nice api ...
>  then john doe doesnt need to know anything about chicken or that chicken is
>  there, hes just loading some shared lib that gives server access.
>
>
>  -elf
>
>
>
>  > Regards,
>  >
>  > John.
>  >
>  > On 14/02/2008, Elf <address@hidden> wrote:
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>  On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, john wrote:
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>> Yes, I remember talk of dbus! Any progress Shawn?
>  >> >
>  >> > I am actually doing what you describe now and embedding Chicken to C
>  >> > to handle s-expressions and bit stuffing them (packedobjects). I was
>  >> > curious though to examine ways of removing the dependency of Chicken
>  >> > from the graphical client and using dbus to communicate with another
>  >> > entity that handles the s-expressions. Removing Chicken would simplify
>  >> > building the graphical client on the mobile. The problem is just moved
>  >> > to another place and hidden from C developers who could focus on the
>  >> > client. If that makes sense.
>  >> >
>  >> >
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> whats wrong with simply including libchicken.so (built for whatever 
> platform)
>  >>  with the codeball for the graphical client?  wouldnt need to build 
> chicken
>  >>  again there and youd be simplifying interfaces and reducing 
> dependencies...
>  >>  with a little work, you could even write some code that only used the 
> bits
>  >>  of chicken you needed, compile that to a static lib, and send that, if
>  >>  space is at an insane premium...
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>  -elf
>  >>
>  >
>




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]