Re: G-WRAP

[Rob Browning]

Ariel Rios <address@hidden> writes:

> On 23 May 2001 13:48:47 +0200, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> 
> > Would it be appropriate to name the module `guile-wrap', to give it a
> > more official relationship with Guile?
> That sounds way better. Specially since you avoid the 
> confusion that glib, gtk makes calling things like gobject, gmodule, etc

That might be fine, though originally g-wrap was intended to be more
general.  It initially had bindings for guile and RScheme and there
was some thought about extending it further.  However, these days it
only supports guile, and there are no immediate plans to change that.

So far the only assertion has been that g-wrap will, from now on,
depend on guile at wrapper generation time (since the generator itself
will only be implemented in guile), but I've been toying with the idea
of just dropping the idea that g-wrap will be anything other than a
guile wrapper generator.  I think we might be better served by a
tightly coupled guile-specific system.

All that said, I don't have a strong feeling about the name either
way, though I would like to ask Christopher how he feels about it if
we decide we'd like to change it.

Also, leaving the name alone, at least for a while could avoid a
decent amount of renaming work in the code and docs.

-- 
Rob Browning <address@hidden> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930