[GD-General] Re: scripting via COM?

[Andras B. <and...@gm...>]

I forgot to mention, that I'm mainly interested in extending scripting
languages, not embedding them. So the entrypoint is in the script, and
it just uses the services of the engine to do low level stuff.


Andras

Wednesday, January 25, 2006, 9:09:45 PM, you wrote:

> My biggest annoyance with scripting has always been somehow exporting
> my C++ classes and functions to the scripting languages. I know that there
> are tools to help with this, but I never really liked any of them.
> They are always a pain to setup and use, and the binding is too rigid.

> Now, I believe that most decent scripting languages have some kind of
> support to easily call into COM objects. So I was thinking: Wouldn't
> it be the best to just wrap my engine into a COM object, and then the
> scripting language just makes calls into it through COM? This would
> also make the binding between the scripting and the engine much more
> dynamic. So it would be possible to use the same engine from virtually
> any scripting language that can access COM objects.

> I'm not terribly experienced in scripting, so it's possible that I'm
> missing out on a lot of important issues..
> What are your thoughts on this?




> Andras