I'd like to find a way to write an API that can be accessed from any other programming language via language bindings (or some other framework). Is it possible to do this? If so, which programming language would be the most suitable for writing a "cross-language" API? My goal is to create a single set of functions that I can access from any programming language that I'm working with, so that I won't need to manually re-write the entire API in each language.

  • 4
    If you just want to be able to say "we support EVERYTHING" for marketing reasons, you can just write a low-level DLL or shared library in C. If you want anybody in say, Java, to use your thingy, you'd better provide a Java interface.
    – mjfgates
    Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 7:59
  • 1
    You say "(almost) any", which languages would you exclude for this purpose? Or which are the most important to you?
    – funkybro
    Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 8:12
  • 22
    Webservice? You can write some functions in for instance php. Almost any language has the posibility to interface with webpages, supply arguments and read the results.
    – Pieter B
    Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 8:28
  • 7
    +1 'cause it's an interesting question - but your question would be improved by saying why you want to do this. What are your goals?
    – TarkaDaal
    Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 8:28
  • @PieterB => answer. Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 13:05

8 Answers 8


You have a few options:

  1. Create an HTTP interface, almost everything can talk HTTP so that will get you a lot of languages.

  2. Create something that can be linked into a language runtime, this will be rather time consuming as you will need to find a way to connect it to many different languages.

  • What kind of HTTP interface do you have in mind, specifically? Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 16:01
  • @AndersonGreen It shouldn't matter (since any language that can open a network socket can speak HTTP), but REST is a useful pseudo-standard. Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 16:12
  • 7
    REST + JSON would be a reasonable solution Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 17:53
  • I also agree, using HTTP to communicate allows pretty much every language out there to interact with your application's functions. Commented Jul 26, 2012 at 21:29

I think C or C++ would be most suitable for your purpose. You can use SWIG (Simplified Wrapper and Interface Generator) to generate language bindings from your C or C++ API.

SWIG is a software development tool that connects programs written in C and C++ with a variety of high-level programming languages. SWIG is used with different types of target languages including common scripting languages such as Perl, PHP, Python, Tcl and Ruby. The list of supported languages also includes non-scripting languages such as C#, Common Lisp (CLISP, Allegro CL, CFFI, UFFI), D, Go language, Java including Android, Lua, Modula-3, OCAML, Octave and R. Also several interpreted and compiled Scheme implementations (Guile, MzScheme/Racket, Chicken) are supported. SWIG is most commonly used to create high-level interpreted or compiled programming environments, user interfaces, and as a tool for testing and prototyping C/C++ software. SWIG is typically used to parse C/C++ interfaces and generate the 'glue code' required for the above target languages to call into the C/C++ code. SWIG can also export its parse tree in the form of XML and Lisp s-expressions. SWIG is free software and the code that SWIG generates is compatible with both commercial and non-commercial projects...

  • 32
    C++ would be an awful choice. There are numerous problems with it: dependency on a runtime library, unspecified ABI (especially mangling), etc. Generating bindings from C++ headers is prohibitively tricky. SWIG is quite a limited thing. See all the overcomplicated infrastructure around, say, Python Qt bindings.
    – SK-logic
    Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 8:04
  • 14
    @SK-logic: Not really. C needs a runtime lib just like C++. The ABI can be controlled in C++ via extern "C" so it is C-compatible on the outside. Hence, you do have the internal advantages of C++ (higher type-safety, libraries) but the external advantages of C (de facto ABI standard)
    – MSalters
    Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 9:12
  • 3
    @SK-logic The unspecified ABI is simply a solved problem, see SWIG, Boost.Python and a host of other language bindings. Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 13:04
  • 3
    @MSalters don't forget about exceptions and their general non-workiness across library boundaries
    – sehe
    Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 13:07
  • 3
    -1 for C++ suggestion. C is easy, C++ makes things needlessly hard. Commented Jul 21, 2012 at 1:18

There are pretty much 2 ways:

  • a C API. Practically ever language there ever was will load a C library and call its functions. How you do this depends on the source language.
  • a RPC mechanism of some sort. This can be a REST API running over HTTP, or a binary interface running over a socket. Unless you go for the lowest common denominator mechanism (eg a socket) you run the risk of not having client access routines (eg some languages do not have the right SOAP clients to call an API implemented using SOAP, or there are interoperability issues). Stick to the simplest, either a HTTP/REST interface, or a socket. Sockets have the advantage that they do not need a HTTP server to expose the interface to the clients, and can more easily run on the same server as the client with better performance.

The work required for this changes depending on the system used, for example, a socket interface will work, but client-side libraries tend to be more low-level compared to http libraries.

You could try finding a networking library that supports all the languages you want to use, and implement the API in terms of that library - eg, using ZeroMQ gives you a lot of flexibility, so you'd write your API using ZeroMQ interfaces, and then any language that wants to call your API must use the ZeroMQ client library to do so. Choose a library that supports a broad range of languages, and allows you to in-process as well as out-of-process communication for best performance.

  • So what steps would I need to take if I wanted to write the API in multiple languages as well? (In my case, those languages would be Javascript, C++, and Java.) Commented Jul 22, 2012 at 3:14
  • Should I just write 3 separate RESTful APIs for each of the languages? Commented Jul 22, 2012 at 5:38
  • You write a native wrapper in each of these languages that handles the loading and calling the underlying C dll. Or write it in C++ and use SWIG to do this for you. If you're using a REST API, then the same applies, either write a single API and then 3 wrappers, but if you're writing a REST API then each language will be able to call the REST API directly - don't bother with a wrapper.
    – gbjbaanb
    Commented Jul 25, 2012 at 10:44
  • Would the dll (dynamically linked library) be compatible any platform besides Windows? I need cross-platform compatibility here. Commented Jul 25, 2012 at 22:59
  • no, you'd need to recompile it for other platforms. Linux for example uses .so instead of .dll. Just a straight recompile is needed, no (or very minor) code changes.
    – gbjbaanb
    Commented Jul 29, 2012 at 13:52

If performance and call latency is not an issue, consider providing a comprehensive command line interface (probably, using a scripting language on top of it). ImageMagick can be a good example of such an "API". Another good example is Tk toolkit.

  • Which scripting language and/or programming language would you recommend for the purpose of creating a command line foreign function interface? Also, have you found any concrete examples of such interfaces? Commented Jul 27, 2012 at 3:34
  • @AndersonGreen, any language with decent metaprogramming is ok for such a purpose. E.g., Scheme, MetaLua, various other embeddable Lisps, Tcl. You can easily implement your own command language as well. Many CAD/CAE systems operate this way. An already mentioned Tk is another typical example.
    – SK-logic
    Commented Jul 27, 2012 at 8:15
  • In order to use a command-line interface in this way, would you get the console output for a specific command (such as whoami on Ubuntu to get the username), or did you have something else in mind? Commented Dec 13, 2012 at 20:46
  • @AndersonGreen, piping stdin and stdout should be sufficient in most cases.
    – SK-logic
    Commented Dec 13, 2012 at 20:52

By API, what exactly do you mean?

On many platforms you could link to a DLL or similar construction, but would having to be re-compiled for a particular native target (Intel/ARM) or endianness still qualify? A particular binary interface might still have difficulties with certain languages because of datatype issues or constructs (pointers trying to be returned to languages which don't support them well), so you would also have to consider the design of the API itself so as not to exclude some languages or make its use from those languages cumbersome.

Something portable like C and an interface based on binary endpoints in a DLL might be fine and generally callable on most platforms and from most languages, but it might need to be compiled differently and/or offered in different flavors or linked to different static libraries.

It seems to me that the choice of language you write your library or service or whatever is, by definition, not intrinsic to the question until you've given more about the platform/service the API exposes. If you can assume a network stack is available and direct-linked function-call-level performance is not a requirement, the API could easily be HTTP-based with some kind of shim for the client language to make the requests transparent.

I think in general this question is overly broad to be useful in the real world, because you haven't given indication about what kind of API might be suitable given the type of service which is being offered.


To add to above answers that suggest using an RPC mechanism. You could use Apache Thrift.(http://thrift.apache.org/). It is basically a RPC framework.

As per the Thrift wiki:

The Apache Thrift software framework, for scalable cross-language services development, combines a software stack with a code generation engine to build services that work efficiently and seamlessly between C++, Java, Python, PHP, Ruby, Erlang, Perl, Haskell, C#, Cocoa, JavaScript, Node.js, Smalltalk, OCaml and Delphi and other languages

  • How can foreign function calls be done using Apache Thrift? Commented Sep 3, 2012 at 2:46

Have any language write out a text file with function to call with params to pass in. Have your "I get along with anybody" app watching a directory and once it sees a process-call.txt have it go to work. No servers or network protocols; even a non-computer language method can init the functions. Even a person could just create the text file.

Content could look like:

Call-method:  fdisk()
Params:  (string) "/root", (string) "write-back-file-expected.txt"

;) you might wait forever to get an answer though. You just need to push a few bytes to the other process, but I'm sure that's not the whole spec.

  • Seems overly complicated when you could just have a command-line interface + stdin/stdout. Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 16:15
  • 1
    Even better call can ++1 that, Brendan. I never saw it in action but once upon a time people were punching holes in card to transfer the bytes around. Commented Jul 20, 2012 at 20:58
  • 4
    This is a joke answer, right? We don't do that here. Commented Jul 21, 2012 at 1:15
  • Well the fdisk and /root part is a joke, but the I was involved as a platform r&d (developer and analyst) for over 5 years to create a platform-product that produced good in the 10's of millions of dollars. It's spit out millions of shippable physical (not pdf and emails) items for client (with processing Files ranging in hundreds of MBs per item) using this type of REST method. We had major system triolgy-SAP-MS Office-PLC Drivewrs-PDF Workflow all taking to each other and working well together with plain-old-UTF-8-text files and a zip with-in a zip with-in a zip, and no HTTP bs overhead. Commented Jul 21, 2012 at 3:20
  • May I ask a question? Why does no one think that JSON is a joke? How is what I recomended any different? We would/might have used json but it wasn't around in 2003. XML is too fat, but back then that was the flavor of the month not the most pratical and simplest soulition. Commented Jul 21, 2012 at 3:35

OpenGL is a good example of what you describe - it's an API written in C, designed in a way that is easy to write bindings for in other languages

  1. C libraries can be called from most programming languages (usually as compiled extensions, or things like PyPy's ctypes library etc)

  2. All functions take simple data-types as arguments (boolean, integer, floating point, constants, arrays), as functions taking pointers can be awkward to translate into some languages

  3. Having it's own numeric data-types, which specify precision and signed'ness (whereas int float etc can differ)

The resulting API isn't necessarily the nicest-to-use C API you could write if targeting only C users. However it means the functions can be almost directly exposed to another language (e.g the PyOpenGL docs list the differences, most of which are pretty minimal)

On top of this verbose API, you can write more "developer friendly" wrappers around this (game frameworks and such)

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.