Talk:Binding (computer science)
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contents of the Binding (computer science) page were merged into Binding on 6 January 2011 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
What exactly is a binding?
[edit]"binding is the creation of a simple reference to something that is larger and more complicated and used frequently." than what ? Although I study CS I completly do not understand that article.
- Agreed. I'm also CS, though not a programmer (networking and security concentration). I was just poking around Gentoo Portage and seeing some stuff referring to Python bindings. So I google it, come to Wikipedia, and see... this article. Needs serious work - starting with what a binding actually is. The current definition listed ("is the creation of a simple reference to something that is larger and more complicated and used frequently. The simple reference can be used instead of having to repeat the larger thing") is so vague as to mean nothing. If there are multiple kinds of bindings, then perhaps a disambiguation page is in order. Under the currently standing vague definition, everything from a filesystem symlink to a script that calls another script could be counted as a "binding" - say it ain't so.HobgoblinOfLittleMinds (talk) 05:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
protocol binding?
[edit]Ah, there seems to be another type of binding, as mentioned/described at http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/3405/oasis-sstc-saml-bindings-1.1.pdf which i located in SAML 1.1.
--Jerome Potts 20:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
... larger and more complicated and used frequently ?
[edit]In computer science, binding is the creation of a simple reference to something that is larger and more complicated and used frequently.
When talking about bindings to allow access to something defined externally from a given programming language, the bound object is not necessarily more complex or larger, nor does it implies that it is used frequently. If there is no binding, you can not access the external object at all. However, there is no relation that implies that, since a binding is done, that it must be used frequently.
For example, there are some bindings that allow Python to access functions offered by the QT framework. A programmer may only use the basic functions provided by Python and never use the QT functionw even if they are available with to the bindings.
-- Samuel Gilbert 2009-03-06 23:22 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.212.17.130 (talk)
Notability / dabify?
[edit]I wonder if this page would be better as a disambiguation page. (Wikipedia is not a jargon guide.) What's the benefit of summarizing all these uses of "binding" here? Certain kinds of binding are certainly notable. However, are there any sources that substantiate binding's notability, in computing, in general? --Pnm (talk) 04:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- If we can't find someone to contribute a comprehensible definition/introduction (see comments above), this article should be converted to a disambig or should be removed entirely. --Kvng (talk) 15:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I gave it a WP:BOLD shot. If kept it ought to be merged into Binding (disambiguation). --Pnm (talk) 19:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
- I put up some merge banners. --Kvng (talk) 17:09, 1 January 2011 (UTC)