Re: [pygccxml-development] DSL challenge

[Allen B. <al...@vr...>]

Roman Yakovenko wrote:

> On 8/22/06, Allen Bierbaum <al...@vr...> wrote:
>
>> My first comment would be to put this on the wiki so we can all comment
>> on it and discuss it.
>
>
> Please become a leader of this effort :-).

No problem.  I will take on the DSL design and discussion.  Can I assume 
that means that you aren't going to introduce a new DSL and surprise us 
all?  :)

>
>> The second comment I would have is it seems strange to me that you
>> dismiss the idea of a DSL by introducing a proposed API with
>> deficiencies that you don't like and they saying "see it is bad".
>
>
> The only API I introduced was Py++ one. I did not say anything about 
> how DSL
> API looks like.

The BUI that you proposed was what I was thinking about.

>
>>  I
>> think there is a way around each of these issues and from what I see of
>> the interface you created I already submitted a ~5 line patch that you
>> rejected that would add this ability to the existing interface.
>
>
> Lets talk use cases. I introduced the problematic ones. I expect from you
> to prove me being wrong or to provide good solution.

Yes, I have some ideas here.  I will try them out on my current project 
with the method I suggested of extending and overriding the py++ api.

>> The last comment is that I still don't see how you think the template
>> support could be done this way with gccxml and pygccxml in the mix.  I
>> don't see a  way around the two phased approach.
>
>
> This paper I still have to write :-). But in general you are right, I
> don't like two
> phased approach, but it is possible to implement it.

By "paper" can I assume you mean comment on the wiki page about 
templates?  That would be much more helpful IMHO then a .rest document 
or mailing list posting.

-Allen

>
>