Re: The current state of interfacing Lua with C++ code

[Miles Bader <miles@...>]

Asko Kauppi <askok@dnainternet.net> writes:
> I would warn you about SWIG - imho it's way too complex for the job at
> hand (when Lua is concerned).  I've tried to like it twice, and failed
> both times. :/

I disagree.  I think SWIG is, if anything, one of the _simplest_ to use
for basic interfacing (it's really easy to get a basic interface going),
and yet even this "simple" usage, will give you a pretty complete "Lua
view" of all your C++ classes.  Once you want to do more, it's very
flexible and gives you a lot of power to tweak the interface etc.

Of course it depends on what you want to do -- if you only want to
export a simple list of functions with basic datatypes (int/float/...),
maybe one of the simpler binding libraries will do the job.  But if you
want to take an existing C++ library, including classes, methods,
overloaded functions, etc, etc, SWIG makes the effort required pretty
minimal.

[and of course it's pretty nice that you can then make interfaces for
_other_ languages (python, ruby, ...) with only a little extra work.
Not that I really _want_ to, mind you, but I'm sure there are people out
there...]

-Miles

-- 
Come now, if we were really planning to harm you, would we be waiting here,
 beside the path, in the very darkest part of the forest?