Talk:Forth Lesson 21

Jump to: navigation, search

Unintegrated, re my gobject project:

(09:05:21 PM) cscott-olpc: from my brief read of neon, i'm pretty sure that's not how i was going to implement the gobject bindings; i was going to use vocabularies as in
(09:06:16 PM) MitchBradley_: OFW device nodes are implemented as a pair of vocabularies, one for the properties and one for the methods
(09:07:40 PM) MitchBradley_: which is why you see device names when you say  "order" after e.g. "dev /wlan"
(09:09:36 PM) MitchBradley_: Hmm, I guess I pretty much already said that in lesson 21
(09:10:40 PM) cscott-olpc: would it make sense to make gobject bindings part of the device tree to reuse that machinery?
(09:11:11 PM) MitchBradley_: I couldn't say without looking at gobject in more detail.
(09:12:27 PM) MitchBradley_: My best guess is that it's probably best to just use the vocabulary mechanism directly.  The device tree machinery probably has enough specialized elaborations to get in the way.
(09:12:29 PM) cscott-olpc: i've lost a lot of state, but the key transform is taking a c-method like gtk_window_open(GtkWindow *window, ...) and wrapping the GtkWindow struct such that you can say something like in your target language
(09:13:35 PM) cscott-olpc: 'window open' in forth might work if 'window' pushed an appropriate vocabulary on the stack
(09:13:43 PM) MitchBradley_: The multiple-code-field stuff that is in the Forth layer underneath OFW might be more appropriate.
(09:14:58 PM) MitchBradley_: basically the way that works is that you define a set of operator functions that apply to a data structure, then define a word to make an instance of that data structure.
(09:15:54 PM) MitchBradley_: the instance is named, and you chose the operaition with   "operator-name instance-name".
(09:16:09 PM) MitchBradley_: E.g.  "to foo"
(09:16:23 PM) MitchBradley_: where "to" is the operator name.
(09:16:38 PM) MitchBradley_: there is also a postfix way to invoke it.

CScott 02:18, 9 February 2013 (UTC)