From octave-maintainers-request at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu Mon Dec 16 11:26:14 2002
Subject: RE: foreign function interface
From: "Lippert, Ross A." <Ross dot Lippert at celera dot com>
To: "Per Persson" <persquare at mac dot com>
Cc: "Paul Kienzle" <pkienzle at jazz dot ncnr dot nist dot gov>,    <octave-maintainers@bevo.che.wisc.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:26:12 -0500


Yeah, that looks like the right thing.  To make it even more
instantaneous, you have some standard .h files for common function
signatures and sed them into .h files for the function your after
and then call matwrap through system(), maybe.


-r

-----Original Message-----
From: Per Persson [mailto:persquare at mac dot com]
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 12:00 PM
To: Lippert, Ross A.
Cc: Paul Kienzle; octave-maintainers at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu
Subject: Re: foreign function interface



On Monday, December 16, 2002, at 05:52 PM, Lippert, Ross A. wrote:

>
> What about, instead, something less ambitious, but almost as powerful. 
>  Suppose
> that one had an "instant oct-file" version of mkoctfile, which 
> produces a .oct
> wrapper for a given function from a given library given some signature 
> information
> (and perhaps C, C++, Fortran linkage information).  This 
> instant-octfile program
> would be run outside octave (or within octave via system()).
>

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean, but I think that matwrap does 
just that:
http://www-lnc.usc.edu/~holt/matwrap/

Regards,
Per

------------
Per Persson
Blekinge Institute of Technology
Dept. of Signal Processing and Telecommunications

www:   http://www.its.bth.se/staff/pee
e-mail: per dot persson at bth dot se