Let's get this finished
Manuel M. T. Chakravarty
chak at cse.unsw.edu.au
Sun Jan 7 00:16:00 EST 2001
Sven Panne <Sven.Panne at informatik.uni-muenchen.de> wrote,
> Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
> > [...] If language separation is realistic, we would also keep
> > errno handling outside basic Foreign.
> Hmmm, indeed. `CErrors' or `CErrno' would be a good name IMHO.
`CError' by our current naming scheme.
> > But it yields several separate C-specific modules...
> > module CForeign?
> > It would reexport Foreign, CTypes, CTypesISO, MarshalCString and
> > CErrors (or whatever they will be called).
> I'd second that (with the small addition that MarshalCString is
> replaced by CString/CStringLen).
BTW, shall we really seperate CString and CStringLen into
two different modules? I am all for modularisation, but in
this case I am not sure whether it is worth it.
More information about the FFI