[Xcb] Thomas Coppi's Objective-C binding

[Thomas Coppi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jamey Sharp wrote:
> Hey folks,
> 
> In case Thomas Coppi is just being shy, I want to point people at his
> early prototype of an Objective-C binding to XCB. :-)
> 	http://svn.berlios.de/viewcvs/zde/trunk/obj-xcb/
> 
> Thomas, I know you have some design questions. Would you write them up
> here for us?
> 
> --Jamey
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xcb mailing list
> Xcb at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xcb

Sorry for taking so long to reply, but my time has been taken up by
school-related things, notably tests and studying for them.

My biggest question about how to proceed is how to interface with
events.  I would like there to be an event-loop system if possible,
similar to Gtk+, so that there is less complexity to the user
application, but it should also be able to handle interfacing with
network sockets.  It also must be asynchronous to properly deal with XCB
replys.  I probably need some sort of internal queue to deal with that
correctly.  I have edited my application to reflect some time at the
beginning to research ways to do this.  I don't think that simply
leaving events out in the open is an acceptable way of handling this.

My next question was something that Jamey brought up in his comment on
my application, which is auto-generating code from XCB's xml protocol
descriptions.  I am not quite sure what is involved in this, but I don't
think that it is necessary, as Objective-C can function as C for all
intents and purposes, meaning that it can use C structs, unions, enums,
and all that jazz, without modification.  The only thing Objective-C
adds to plain C is a simple Object system.  The bindings to Objective-C
would therefore consist of mostly an encapsulation of core XCB functions
and routines into Objects that hide the complexity of calling the
functions directly, and simplify the usage of them as common functions
with similar functionality or scope can be grouped together.

Any questions and/or comments about my questions are appreciated.
Again, sorry for such a late reply.

- ---
Thomas Coppi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEYU7LlU6kaExSKKoRAnBEAJoCyT9iwEQixhbCvR5ZMJGpdMOwaQCePuZn
fLkasKSBWhleuWM0ZuLJ0vk=
=Grkh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----