Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!xanth!mcnc!godot!tracton
From: tracton@godot.radonc.unc.edu (Gregg Tracton)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: WHAT'S THIS XTK DOING IN MY SOUP?
Keywords: Xtk, multiple languages
Message-ID: <1135@godot.radonc.unc.edu>
Date: 15 Nov 89 15:57:06 GMT
Reply-To: tracton@godot.radonc.unc.edu (Gregg Tracton)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Radiation Oncology NCMH/UNC, Chapel Hill, NC
Lines: 21

X Fans,
  If an X programmer wants to call an XToolkit from multiple languages,
in theory, should the vendor supply multiple bindings to the toolkit?
Or should the programmer write the bindings? Are bindings a good idea?
  Would creating a message passing protocol to this theoretical toolkit 
be too much of an investment for a binding? Or should an
X programmer just write a few language wrappers, which translate a call
from one language to another?
  Certainly the XToolkit would have to use the lowest common denominator
of argument types in its interface, right? (Where argument types are
pass-by-value, pass-by-address, pass-by-name...) For instance, if
Fortran (yuch!) were to be included in the group of supported languages,
pass-by-value would be the only supported argument type, right?
  How have others solved (or ignored) this problem sucessfully?

-Gregg "what's this Xtk stuff doing in my soup?" Tracton

-- 
Gregg Tracton      Dept of Radiation Oncology  tracton@godot.radonc.unc.edu
(919)-966-1101       Univ of North Carolina      {...}mcnc!godot!tracton
  "In C++, only your friends have access to your private members."