On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Evan Phoenix <evan@fallingsnow.net> wrote:

> I don't see any benefit of this over the existing syntax.
>
> I must advise against changing things like this at this stage in the game. The FFI implementations are already a bit diverged, and adding something like this would only serve to completely destabilize any cross impl. using of FFI.

Not to mention that one can simply implement a different method that
takes arguments like this in a few lines.

>
>  - Evan
>
>
> On Dec 11, 2009, at 3:17 PM, rogerdpack wrote:
>

>> Perhaps it would be possible to allow for named paramters to an ffi
>> call, like
>>
>> attach_function 'puts', :parameters => [ :string ], :returns => :int
>>
>> or
>>
>> attach_function 'puts', :parameters => [ :string ], :takes => :int
>>
>> or
>>
>> attach_function 'puts', :parameters => [ :string ], :returns
>> => :int, :name => 'puts_c' # use this ruby name
>>
>> or
>>
>> attach_function 'puts', [:string, :string] => :int # two string
>> parameters return an int
>>
>> That would make it possible to write the examples a lot more readable.
>>
>> An example lib that does the named parameters on the fly is
>> http://github.com/maca/arguments
>>
>> Thoughts?
>> -r
>>

>
>

-- 
Michael Fellinger
CTO, The Rubyists, LLC
972-996-5199