Hi Dale, hi Steve,
Thank you very much for your suggestions!
Steve> I’m sure users may have alternate opinions once they have something to play with.
I like both approaches. So for the time being I will implement them both and leave the decision to the user.
Thank you also for the idea to allow entire scripts at the place of a file path!
Steve> Looking forward to seeing your work.
Thank you : ) I will clean it up a bit and then post a very simple first version for the case that somebody is interested.
I am using Embeddable Common Lisp (ECL, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embeddable_Common_Lisp , http://ecls.sourceforge.net/ ) to implement the common lisp interface.
ECL makes it easy to extend the functionality in common lisp or C++, whatever is faster or handier. Unfortunately the common lisp wrappers have to be coded mostly by hand. This could be seen as a feature as well, as ECL’s mixed programming style encourages a flexible approach to scripting and the creation of domain-specific languages. Also it is possible to optimize scripts by implementing critical parts in C++. But it also adds an extra level of complexity and it would be nice to be able to automatically generate default wrappers as well : )
By the way, how is the .NET bridge to C++ implemented? By hand? Do you generate it automatically?