[lsb-discuss] Should language bindings for LSB libs be in LSB?
jeff at licquia.org
Thu Feb 7 12:54:45 PST 2008
Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
> There are an assortment of language bindings
> available which enable using particular libraries
> in languages in which they are not written.
> Python has bindings for most LSB libraries.
> Perl probably has just as many.
> Some libraries have C++ wrappers -
> glibmm, gtkmm, gdkmm.
> We've touched before, and deferred, the discussion
> of whether these wrappers should be part of LSB.
I'm inclined to take these piecemeal--neither have a rule excluding
them, nor one requiring them. Let demand pull them in.
It would seem that C++ bindings would be particularly easy to ship as
part of the app in question, especially in cases where the bindings
aren't quite stable yet. OTOH, we can't allow the shipping of dynamic
language bindings without specifying the language's C extension
interface, which is something none of the dynamic languages have been
keen on us doing.
More information about the lsb-discuss