From c04f801d67ba915bf4733a56768e2c04cfad2628 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: nek0 Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 01:22:05 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] typoes --- ...19-Interfacing-variadic-functions-from-Haskell.md | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/posts/2016-04-19-Interfacing-variadic-functions-from-Haskell.md b/posts/2016-04-19-Interfacing-variadic-functions-from-Haskell.md index 2783ea1..093789f 100644 --- a/posts/2016-04-19-Interfacing-variadic-functions-from-Haskell.md +++ b/posts/2016-04-19-Interfacing-variadic-functions-from-Haskell.md @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ tags: english, programming description: Some findings I made while playing with the Haskell FFI --- -I confess I am a Haskell afficionado. Whenever I program something for pleasure, I usually prefer this +I confess I am a Haskell aficionado. Whenever I program something for pleasure, I usually prefer this language because of its elegance. Currently I am working on Haskell bindings to the [GEGL](http://www.gegl.org/) library. The motivation @@ -13,14 +13,14 @@ behind this my desire to dabble in Game development and I have the need for a li Surfaces. I am obviously not really a fan of the easy solutions and I try to learn new things. Like using the Haskell FFI. -While writing the bindings I encountere the problem, that GEGL exposes variadic functions in its header +While writing the bindings I encountered the problem, that GEGL exposes variadic functions in its header which I need to interface. This poses a serious Problem for Haskell because the number of function arguments has to be constant. There is simply no way defining a function without knowing how many arguments it has and of what type each argument is. This stays true even for my solution. The only reason -my solution works is that I can limit the cases how to interface these variadic functions to a managable +my solution works is that I can limit the cases how to interface these variadic functions to a manageable amount. -To build my bindings I do not use the standard FFI of haskell, but the Haskell library +To build my bindings I do not use the standard FFI of Haskell, but the Haskell library [inline-c](http://hackage.haskell.org/package/inline-c) to call the C functions directly without using rigid bindings. This is achieved in inline-c by wrapping the function call into a QuasiQuoter. As I said earlier, this still requires you to write a QuasiQuoter for every case this function gets called, but you @@ -28,5 +28,5 @@ don't have to clutter your code with `foreign import ccall` declarations. For limiting your cases I recommend using a sum type as a function argument. A sum type is a type which has multiple constructors. You can have a constructor for each case you need to interface and distinguish -between them using Haskells patter matching. You can see an example on hpw to make all this -[in my bindings](https://github.com/nek0/gegl/blob/master/src/GEGL/FFI/Node.hs#L59). +between them using Haskell's pattern matching. You can see an example on how to make all this +[in my bindings](https://github.com/nek0/gegl/blob/master/src/GEGL/FFI/Node.hs).