C++ Python language bindings

Roman Yakovenko wrote:
> data.add_property( "count", count, set_count )
>   
Should it be possible to leave out the 'set' function to make a 
read-only property? When I tried something like:

data.add_property( "count", count )


 I got:

  File "C:\Program 
Files\Python\lib\site-packages\pyplusplus\code_creators\properties.py", 
line 56, in has_long_line
    elif pd.fset or pd.fset.call_policies or not 
pd.fset.call_policies.is_default():
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'call_policies'

Thanks,

--- Kevin

On 9/26/06, Kevin Bluck <kevin.bluck@...> wrote:
> Roman Yakovenko wrote:
> > data.add_property( "count", count, set_count )
> >
> Should it be possible to leave out the 'set' function to make a
> read-only property?

Yes of course. By default 'set' is None

> When I tried something like:
>
> data.add_property( "count", count )
>
>
>  I got:
>
>   File "C:\Program
> Files\Python\lib\site-packages\pyplusplus\code_creators\properties.py",
> line 56, in has_long_line
>     elif pd.fset or pd.fset.call_policies or not
> pd.fset.call_policies.is_default():
> AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'call_policies'
>

Actually it was my bug. Fix in svn. Unit test has been updated.

-- 
Roman Yakovenko
C++ Python language binding
http://www.language-binding.net/

> Actually it was my bug. Fix in svn. Unit test has been updated.
>

Thanks, SVN rev. 595 fixed the AttributeError.

I notice that add_property causes the generated C++ to go from IDL 
syntax to exposer_t syntax even in the simplest of cases. Is this 
intended behavior?

Thanks,

--- Kevin

On 9/27/06, Kevin Bluck <kevin.bluck@...> wrote:
>
> > Actually it was my bug. Fix in svn. Unit test has been updated.
> >
>
> Thanks, SVN rev. 595 fixed the AttributeError.
>
> I notice that add_property causes the generated C++ to go from IDL
> syntax to exposer_t syntax even in the simplest of cases. Is this
> intended behavior?

Yes. There are few reasons for this:
1. readability - I think that generated code is more readable. If you
stay with IDL like
   syntax you will get very very long line.
2. compilation errors - it is much easier to understand what compiler says
3. For MSVC 7.1 compiler, for template classes instantiations you have to
    define function type and than to use it within expression,
otherwise the generated
    code will not compile.
4. Lack of time - I can implement IDL like syntax, but it will
complicate the code.
    I don't have enough time to implement and test it.

If you think that this should be fixed - consider to contribute your
time and efforts :-)

-- 
Roman Yakovenko
C++ Python language binding
http://www.language-binding.net/