On 2008-12-11, Jason Roelofs <jameskilton / gmail.com> wrote:

> I'd ask that  if you already need to write and  compile a wrapper to
> make a library work with FFI,  then why bother with FFI in the first
> place?

To  get portability  across different  Ruby implementations.   This is
really my way of contributing to  FFI: it's really cool but it seems a
little short of  actual applications.  I doubt I can  make it any more
cool than  it already  is, but I  can do  something about the  lack of
applications.

> Rice / Rb++ will  get you a lot farther in less  time than trying to
> hack your way into using the FFI library,

I already have a  working toy FFI/C++ application, including callbacks
that  hook  virtual C++  methods  back into  Ruby  and  it was  almost
disappointingly  straightforward to  do.  I  suspect it  will  be less
effort than  you make  out.  And if  I'm wrong  about that, I'll  be a
sadder and wiser man.  Worse things happen at C, I mean sea.

Thanks again for your help,

Jeremy Henty