World: r3wp

How complicated would it be to make a Red binding for Freecoin?

Red would be more suitable than Red/System

It's quite a mess, and that's why everybody is rewriting stuff

Freecoin still has the Bitcoin interface, so you'd have to do JSON 
with a daemon. Not very comfortable until you have PARSE

I see. I haven't looked yet at Freecoin source code.

LibBitcoin has bindings, so you could bind to the C interface. But 
they're using 64 bits numbers everywhere, so that would be uncomfortable 
until Red/System has them

Freecoin doesn't seem to use LibBitcoin at all yet

I've decided to first port some of it to Syllable and wait a while 
with the bindings

There are also horrible heaps of C++ dependencies

On the callback matter, wouldn't it be better to always generate 
them as cdecl?

Maybe.

I don't see how a trampoline would work very well, because we're 
talking user written callbacks, so each would need its own trampoline

No, only your GTK dialect API would need them (one for button, one 
for window, ...).

The callbacks can have different numbers of arguments, and the widgets 
will eventually have multiple callbacks

Ah, I thought that "action" callback would all share the same definition.

callbacks

Anyway, forcing cdecl for all callbacks might be a better option. 
I would need to check first if there's no internal compiler drawback 
on this option.

Not always. You can for example pass gtk-quit without parameters, 
while the regular number of parameters is two

If I force the 'action callback in the GTK script to 'cdecl (by hardcoding 
it in the compiler), it's not crashing anymore. So the cause is confirmed.

Cool

Just thinking about a drawback for your proposition: Windows API 
expects callbacks using stdcall convention...

I'm falling apart here. I'm going to sleep

Same here.

:-)

In C system programs it's common to specify the calling convention. 
It's probably reasonable to require an attribute, but I would say 
callbacks for Windows are the exception that would require one

Red/System uses stdcall too internally, so forcing user to use a 
cdecl attribute for Red level callbacks is not natural. Need to think 
more about it to find a better option.

No, I mean to default to cdecl - which I thought was already implied 
by CALLBACK - and require to add stdcall only for Windows system 
callbacks

I don't think it is a good solution to put the burden on Windows 
users only.

It's only for Windows system callbacks. Most all other libraries 
on Windows use cdecl, and it is only for callbacks, not for general 
Windows system functions

If stdcall would be the default, even Windows users would have to 
write it many more times than the other way around

I've started on an SQLite binding

Ah, nice :-)

I have documented the calling convention issue here: https://github.com/dockimbel/Red/issues/176

I think it should be reasonable enough to choose cdecl when a function 
pointer is passed to a variadic function.

Doc - I noticed (in your presentation), that port! dtype will be 
supported. I wondered how IO is going to be done,e.g. networking,or 
files. Will it be wrappers written in RED upon read-io, write-io 
Red/System functions?

I haven't decided yet on the implementation detail, but my current 
plan is to use a R3-like approach, passing messages to a lower-level 
layer wrote in Red/System.

Note that I'm only using variadic functions in the GTK binding so 
far. The issues in the other bindings are with regular functions

Are you using also function pointers only in GTK binding?

Are you using function pointers only in GTK binding?

No, there are callbacks in most bindings

The crash on the older GTK on Syllable Server is gone

Will it be wrappers written in RED upon read-io, write-io Red/System 
functions?
 


Just to be sure there is no confusion: the read-io and write-io function 
mentioned in the slides have nothing to do with the REBOL homonyms. 
The Red/System ones are wrapper on CPU's IN and OUT instructions.

OK, thanks for the clarification ...

SDL audio still crashes

You should compile it in verbose mode (-v 6) and check the callbacks 
calling convention in the symbols block at the end of the compilation 
logs.

It should be stdcall or cdecl. If you see ??, it means the compiler 
hasn't been able to solve it.

Bingo, it says ?? for the audio callback

Ah!

The ?? is the default value for cconv. When the compiler encounters 
a get-word!, it propagates the cconv from the function using it as 
argument.

How are you passing callbacks? Same way as with GTK binding through 
a variadic function?