> This sounds very nice. I am toying with the concept of being able
> to call an OS API (Under MSWindows) from Python, without C support
> (simiar to the way SmallTalk and Visual Basic can - ie, name the
> function, and just call it, with the params magically working themselves
> out).
I'm sure that my type system would help here, but the way I see it, it
would require a few lines of machine dependent assembly code for each
machine to which Python is ported.
An alternate solution to the same problem is to automatically generate
binding functions from C, C++ or some intermediate header file. This
is the approach we have been taking. While doing this, I have found
many uses for my type system. The approach is similar to what Guido
has done for the gl module.
> So apart from the nice features you describe that your system would give,
> I can see other benefits of such a tool.
Are you just refering to the problem that you mentioned above, or do
you have other ideas as well? I would be interested to know what
people would find useful in such a system. Much of the coding is
already done, but many issues still remain, like how to bind it to
Python for example. So any suggestions would be welcomed.
> So count me as one more Python user supportive of this :-)
Thank you, I will.
-- Donald Beaudry V.I. Corporation don@vicorp.com Northampton, MA 01060 ** If you think there's a solution, you're part of the problem **