Re^3: Developing Perl against proprietary interfaces

You might, but I wouldn't. I've also used SWIG and I found it to be mostly a waste of time. It offers something I don't need (bindings for multiple languages) in exchange for greatly increased complexity. That complexity hides the actual details of the XS interface that you'll need to effectively debug your code. And you will need to debug your code!

-sam

Comment on Re^3: Developing Perl against proprietary interfaces

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Developing Perl against proprietary interfaces by wade (Pilgrim) on Apr 22, 2008 at 20:31 UTC
My approach (which, admittedly, won't work for everybody) was to debug the two sides, separately. I got the Perl working with the C calls stubbed-out and I got the C working with a test harness on that side. At that point, I plugged the bad boys together and it worked like a charm. Of course, YMMV. -- Wade	[reply]
Re^5: Developing Perl against proprietary interfaces by wade (Pilgrim) on Apr 22, 2008 at 21:32 UTC
Yikes! Was this node down-voted because somebody really doesn't like SWIG, because I defended my original post, because I elided the complexities of the interface, or for some other reason? I didn't mean to step on toes, here. -- Wade	[reply]
Re^6: Developing Perl against proprietary interfaces by Anonymous Monk on Apr 23, 2008 at 03:28 UTC
Only the person who voted knows, and they're not saying. But then you knew that already.	[reply]
Re^6: Developing Perl against proprietary interfaces by samtregar (Abbot) on Apr 23, 2008 at 16:58 UTC
Try not to take voting personally. Sometimes people down-vote just because they disagree with what you're saying. Maybe they agree with me about swig being mostly a waste of time. -sam	[reply]