Bindings for other languages - benefits of?

cormullion · Post by **cormullion** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 10:06 am

I'm now doing some scripting using newLISP, and therefore using 'growlnotify' to do Growl. It works fine (quick, flexible, easy), so I was wondering - what are the benefits of a specific interface (like the ones for Perl, Python, etc) rather than a call to the command-line utility. Faster? More flexible? I'm not a developer-type so I wouldn't know what to ask for...

Post by **The_Tick** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 5:05 am

Sorry, I saw this thread, I meant to post, and then it just didn't happen, heh.

So the benefits of a binding over growlnotify. There's a couple that I can hilight:

1) growlnotify isn't installed by default on the users system. This means you have to depend on them doing it. For every binding except the perl bindings, you either can include it in your script, or it gets shipped with Growl and installed with Growl (referring to cocoa/carbon/applescript in the second part here).

2) It makes it easier to talk Growl in the language you prefer.

There's probably more, but I'm having problems remembering the major ones right now.

cormullion · Post by **cormullion** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 12:07 pm

Thanks! I'll ask the newLISP gurus whether it's a difficult or worthwhile job.

As for ease of calling, it's not too hard at the moment:

Code: Select all

(exec (format "/usr/local/bin/growlnotify %s -m \"processing file  '%s'\"" (date) file-name))

Post by **The_Tick** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 1:38 pm

Ya. Look at the other bindings, most of them aren't that big at all. Heck, the Ruby bindings are 4 k in size altogether, and only one file.