From: Abraham Egnor (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Jan 12 2002 - 12:57:29 PST
Python is indeed more popular than Ruby, at least here in the US. Another
thing to look at if you haven't already is Swig. Swig vastly simplifies
writing bindings - it can just take c/c++ header files and generate
binding code for perl, python, ruby, java, whatever.
I'm glad you're going for python over perl, as I really can't stand perl.
I think having as much in python as possible is good, and I doubt there'll
be any speed issues - because evas is so high-level, all of the drawing
will still be done in c-land.
On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Evan Martin wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 10:28:52AM -0500, Abraham Egnor wrote:
> > Python is second on my list of good scripting languages, after Ruby. You
> > might want to take a look at it if you haven't heard of it before.
> I read a bit about it, and it did seem pretty nice.
> Really, I should be doing it in Perl just because that's the language
> everyone knows... but I just can't do it. Perl is too ugly. :)
> I'd like to learn Ruby, but I think that I'll stick with Python because
> a) I know it so well
> b) I've already done a lot of work with it (including learning the C
> c) It's more popular than Ruby (right?)
> d) It's a good compromise between popularity and cleanliness
> > Wouldn't the plugins still have to be in c? Or were you planning to write
> > Python wrappers for evas as well?
> I've written low-level Python wrappers for evas already, including one C
> function that effectively runs the main further process (handling x
> events and plugin callbacks) so it's speedy.
> The idea is just to use Python for everything possible.
> As I've seen argued a bunch of times: ideally, nothing except the core
> of your system should be written in C. I think writing plugins in any
> scripting language will make them both significantly shorter and easier
> to understand.
> (A warning in advance, because you're new to further: I talk a lot and do
> little. *sigh*)
> Evan Martin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 28 2002 - 23:37:04 PDT