This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 50 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 50 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
> From: Michael Sperber <sperber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Again, I referred to lots of code that *already* is written for > a SRFI-50-style FFI, and that would need to be rewritten anyway > for a JNI- or Pika-style FFI. Putting aside forensics of the exchange that led to that -- it leaves me with a question: What is this "lots of code"? Can we identify and quantify it? How much of it is free software or open source code? Other than code specifically written for S48, and perhaps even for that, I think legacy code is going to need a fairly careful review even if the draft were finalized as-is tomorrow. For example, code for Guile will tend to have been written to be safe for a GC that conservatively traces the C stack and machine registers -- it would need modifications to be correct under the draft. And, for example, while the draft takes a particular position about error handling (that errors in FFI routines called from C are essentially bugs), legacy libraries for some systems are not necessarily written to share this assumption and may be written to use native facilities for exception handling. One advantage of making "convert to Pika-style" a part of such a review process for legacy code is that it forces a more careful look at the code by both human and compiler. -t