[Kde-bindings] Qt & SWIG

[Ruth Ivimey-Cook]

Dimitar and others,

I evaluated using Qyoto for a project I'm working on and - with regret 
for all the hard work Dimitar had obviously put in - decided against it, 
both because it was buggy and because it was very slow. When I 
investigated the speed issue SMOKE relies on textual matching of 
function signatures to call functions. Admittedly the hashes, once 
matched, are hashed and cached, but still...   It also involved at least 
2 transitions from managed to unmanaged code, which IIRC are expensive 
in themselves.

People I know have used SWIG to good effect but I have no personal 
experience.

A statically linked shim file (not a DLL, if possible) - i.e. a set of 
functions coded in managed code that each make an unmanaged call to the 
"real" function would be the way I would expect. Coding this by hand 
would be painful, so a program to generate them is the obvious response. 
I believe this is the SWIG way.

If it were possible I would look into using something like an XML file 
containing the interface definition, maybe itself initially generated 
from the .h files, and which can then be adapted and enhanced to improve 
it. If the Qt and/or SWIG community were receptive this might become 
something people would support generally - e.g. including PyQt et al. - 
which would benefit everyone.

HTH
Ruth


Dimitar Dobrev wrote:
>
>     Dylan,
>
> Thank you for your suggestion. I know about CXXI but it wouldn't be my 
> choice for the following reasons:
>     1. It is both incomplete and abandoned;
>     2. It relies on Reflection.Emit which is not supported on iOS; Qt 
> will soon officially run on iOS and it'd be nice if the bindingsworked 
> on that platform too.
>
>     Regards,
>     Dimitar
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* "Moonfire, D." <d.moonfire at mfgames.com>
> *To:* KDE bindings for other programming languages <kde-bindings at kde.org>
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 11, 2013 9:06 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Kde-bindings] Qt & SWIG
>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Gour <gour at atmarama.net 
> <mailto:gour at atmarama.net>> wrote:
>
>     On Thu, 11 Jul 2013 06:31:43 -0700 (PDT)
>     Dimitar Dobrev <dpldobrev at yahoo.com <mailto:dpldobrev at yahoo.com>>
>     wrote:
>
>     > 3. I don't want to have anything to do with SMOKE any more so if
>     you'd
>     > like to take this path, you'd be on your own.
>
>     Isn't it pity that there is no more interest in having Qt bindings for
>     the .NET/Mono? :-(
>
>
> There was an announcement some years back on one of the Mono blogs 
> about an interop layer for C++ (https://github.com/mono/cxxi). It was 
> never mentioned again and I think a grue ate it, but it looked like a 
> really nice set of libraries if someone maintained it beyond the 
> initial proof of concept. I also don't know how tightly it is tied to 
> Mono itself and if a cross-platform version could be done with it.
>
> Looking at the code, they were also using Qt as the example in their POC.
>
> - Dylan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kde-bindings mailing list
> Kde-bindings at kde.org <mailto:Kde-bindings at kde.org>
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-bindings
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kde-bindings mailing list
> Kde-bindings at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-bindings


-- 
Software Manager & Engineer
Tel: 01223 414180
Blog: http://www.ivimey.org/blog
LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/ruthivimeycook/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-bindings/attachments/20130712/ade21dc0/attachment-0001.html>