Thoughts on GnuPG and automation
daniele at grinta.net
Wed Mar 4 11:25:23 CET 2015
On 03/03/15 14:29, Hans of Guardian wrote:
> It is actually more difficult to wrap GPGME in Java than to have just
> rewritten GPGME in Java. GPGME is a fine API for C/C++, it is a bad
> API for other languages. You end up with an API that feels like a C
> API forced into the language, e.g. Java, python, etc. That makes for
> more coding mistakes because it feels foreign to the programmer.
> More mistakes means more security issues.
I have no idea about the Java tooling for interfacing to external
libraries, but (after seeing so many complaints on the mailing list)
I've recently started to work on Python bindings to GPGME using Cython,
and so far it has been an extremely smooth process and the resulting
Python API feels quite pythonic (I haven't started with the asynchronous
calls yet, those will probably be harder to map in a pythonic way).
The fact that writing the bindings is quite easy, is due indeed to the
fact that GPGME is a fine API for C (and to Cython to a large extent).
More information about the Gnupg-users