[fetter-devel] various
Kenny Tilton
ktilton at nyc.rr.com
Wed Sep 7 19:33:58 UTC 2005
Rayiner Hashem wrote:
> 0. My OpenAL demo now works fine. The segmentation fault was because I
>
> was passing a Lisp rational where a float was needed. My poor-man's
> version of VZN generated wrappers which coerced all arguments before
> calling the true C binding. A quick glance at the CFFI defcfun
> expansion
> suggests automatic conversion is being done there, as well. What am I
> missing? Does the mechanism not attempt converting rationals to
> floats?
>
>
> Luis, could I do this with type translators? I'm guessing type-translators
> are already doing the Lisp float to :float conversion? I'd like to do
> this for strings too.
> Does anybody have any thoughts on an interface for these sorts of
> conversions?
> My idea of manually overriding declarations with more type information is
> far less automatic than what I think people would find convenient.
>
>
> 1. I think VZN should export all symbols. It was a total pain doing
> those manually. Besides, C does not do exported vs. imported, so
> trying
> not to export all symbols is an "extra". And the cost of that extra is
> the aggravation of having to manually cobble together all the
> symbols to
> be exported.
>
>
> Okay. Maybe 'export' should become 'supress'?
Sure. Suppress, unexport, hide,.... give the eager beavers a way to keep
down the symbol count. btw, does gccxml expose anything in/around that
"extern "C"" stuff?
>
>
> 2. The latest VZN gens two warnings:
>
> ; While compiling (METHOD CHECK-AND-MARK-ARTIFICIAL (T)) in
> C:\0devtools\verrazano\frontend\simplifier.lisp:
> Warning: Variable NODE-OR-EDGE is never used.
>
>
> Yeah, I noticed that last night. I'll fix it soon as I get back to my
> computer.
>
> ; While compiling (METHOD GENERATE-PACKAGE ((EQL :CFFI-BACKEND) T
> T)) in
> C:\0devtools\verrazano\cffi-backend\generator.lisp:
> Warning: variable BK is used yet it was declared ignored
>
>
> If I don't (declare (ignore bk)) then SBCL complains that the variable bk
> is declared but never used. Is there an idiomatic NOP on a variable?
(declare (ignorable bk))
Then you can use it or not and the compiler will remain silent in both
cases.
>
>
>
> 4. (VZN) al.h or someone has: #define AL_FALSE 0 and #define
> AL_NO_ERROR
> AL_FALSE. The second define does not make it into the bindings
> because
> it does not look like a numeric constant. I can add it to the
> generated
> bindings manually, but then I have to do it every time I regen the
> bindings. Would it make sense to allow users to provide code in the
> defbinding form which will get blindly copied into the output?:
>
>
> That error specifically will get fixed when I implement macroexpansion
> in the macro-reading code.
> I'm trying to read the standard and figure out the macroexpansion
> algorithm they specify (ordering, termination, etc).
> As for adding something to the generated code, I thought about that,
> but it seems to me to make more sense
> to have a secondary file openal-library-extra.lisp:
>
> (in-package "OPENAL-LIBRARY")
>
> (defconstant +al-no-error+ 0)
>
> Any particular reason putting that in the input file is better?
One-stop shopping. The binding definition then says it all, and I look
one place to maintain or check things. Likewise on the output side,
openal-library.lisp has it all. I am guessing this would be easy (famous
last words) so the simplicity of one specification and one output seem
to justify it. ie, I would not suggest this if it meant a week of work.
>
>
> Btw, why not defconstant when translating #defines?
>
>
> Because:
>
> #define A 1
> do_something()
> #define A 2
> do_something_else()
>
> is legal C code. A naive translation using defconstant will create
> compile time errors, while using defparameter, it'll compile and have
> the correct semantics as well. I can write a pass to promote
> non-duplicate #define's to defconstants, if that'll help with
> error-checking user code.
Does defconstant help the compiler generate faster code? I do not know,
I am not a compiler person.
>
> Anyway, congrats to all on the first "live" set of bindings.
>
>
> Thanks for all the effort you've put in to finding and reporting bugs!
I just mentioned my success on c.l.l and invited more folks to join the
fun. I know how much it helps to have other people testing and
exercising the code so I just have to fix the bugs they find. It is
truly painful to test something after working on it for a long time.
Next stop for me is OpenGL, after that Freeglut for my first callbacks.
Then I can do ImageMagick (my test code runs under OpenGL).
But how will I do a C++ library such as FTGL, where I need to get a C++
class instantiated? Currently I use C glue.
--
Kenny
Why Lisp? http://lisp.tech.coop/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state I finally won out over it."
Elwood P. Dowd, "Harvey", 1950
More information about the fetter-devel
mailing list