[fetter-devel] Re: some FFFI, some sockets

Kenny Tilton ktilton at nyc.rr.com
Mon Jun 27 22:58:47 UTC 2005



Rayiner Hashem wrote:

>>Getting back to your original concern, Rayiner likewise first will
>>produce the Fetter IR (intermediate representation?) and then worry
>>about generating the bindings in some FFI or another. And Rayiner will
>>care only about the API supported by that FFI, not who is underneath.
>>    
>>
>
>In the next few days I'd like to complete the initial design document,
>which is my first milestone. I can leave the FFI bit a little floaty,
>but while writing the design spec, I'll be looking at UFFI (it's
>better documented). It's not a big deal (to me, yet) what Hello-C
>ultimately ends up looking like, though.
>
Yep. UFFI is a good bootstrap target, a good starting point to eyeball 
in developing Fetter. As work proceeds, any deficiency in UFFI gets cure 
in CFFI and eventually that becomes the target of Fetter.

kt






More information about the fetter-devel mailing list